Prominent gay rights groups
Create Post
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 38
  1. #1

    Prominent gay rights groups

    WASHINGTON (AP) - Prominent gay rights groups are ready to issue an election-year pass to Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry even though he opposes same-sex marriage, settling for less than they want in hopes of avoiding a constitutional amendment they fear.

    "It's always disappointing when we find elected officials or candidates who do not support us 100 percent," said Winnie Stachelberg, political director of the Human Rights Campaign.

    "But we understand that people are on a journey of becoming more understanding and more supportive of all that affects the gay and lesbian community."

    Democrats have aggressively courted gay voters and their campaign donations in recent years. Exit polls showed Al Gore got 75 percent of the votes cast by self-identified gays and lesbians in 2000, compared to 25 percent for Bush.



    The rest of the story.

    http://www.sacbee.com/24hour/front/s...-8070253c.html

    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2

    Homophobic?

    Let's ALL get REAL homophobic!

    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #3
    Fags and Dikes running down the street---don't they know they're disturbing my peace.


  4. #4

    Homophobic?

    MAJMike:
    Do you support Gays marriage?

    Democratic rivals John Kerry and John Edwards voiced opposition to gay marriage on Thursday and agreed the issue should be left to the states rather than banned by a constitutional amendment as proposed by President Bush.

    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #5
    Registered User Free Member tacoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    camp horno
    Posts
    18
    Credits
    809
    Savings
    0
    as long as they leave me the hell alone


  6. #6
    Registered User Free Member tacoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    camp horno
    Posts
    18
    Credits
    809
    Savings
    0
    but i am against it


  7. #7
    I don't know how-but those people are reproducing. They gotta be.

    So now, if we actually have an opinion and voice it-we're homophobic? I can see it now. In 50 yrs (maybe less) all the gays & lesbians will be out in public swapping spit and the straight people will be in the closet.


  8. #8
    MajMike

    Please define your understanding of what "homophobic" means. To the best of my understanding, it means to have an intense hatred and/or fear of anything homosexual. If that is the meaning you ascribe to the word, then your usage seems imprecise when applied to the subject you attached it to.

    One does not have to hate or fear homosexuals, of either sex, in order to see that the current controversy is designed by activists to flaunt an alternative to the traditional meaning of an institution, Marriage. Unless you are prepared to change the meaning of the term, as defined for countless decades, then there is no basis to apply it to same sex couples, at any time, nor under any guise.

    The full weight of the legal system already allows for coverage of all the "restricted" functions which are being claimed. The only thing not done is to call such a union a marriage. Why is it necessary to use that term in order to "define" the relationship? What purpose does it serve, other than to thumb politically correct noses in the face of spiritual belief teachings and traditionally accepted mores, to call this supposed "necessity" a marriage?. A good lawyer can write a contract which would give each partner in a non-heterosexual union full legal rights. Why must it be called marriage?

    I understand marriage to be the union of a man and woman for several purposes, amongst them, and unique to the relationship, is the possibility to join and concieve CHILDREN, without artificial means or surrogate methods. The addition of a child or children changes the designation of the new" married couple" to that of new "family."

    For people who find themselves medically unable to have children, that doesn't mean it will never happen. Remember the story in the old Testament, where Abraham's wife Sarah, was barren. Yet, it is written, with supernatural intervention, she conceived through natural means, in her seventh decade of life, and bore Isaac. The potential was there even if the children were not. The same cannot be said for ANY same sex union, unless, through supernatural intervention, one sex was completely transformed into the opposite sex, then returned to original gender after conception is accomplished. Sounds like a good "Twilight Zone" story to me.

    To achieve childbirth in a same sex union, somewhere in the mixture, an outside agency MUST interject itself, to cause an "unnatural" result. The couple, without that agency, could never concieve through the natural method, nor bear any children whatsoever. Oh, that doesn't mean they cannot adopt, or impregnate through "in vitro" insemination, or using a donor's genetic material, concieve life.

    If both partners are female it might work. However, if that were the case, then female homosexuals would have an "unfair advantage" over male homosexuals, since one partner could actually carry the child to term. Neither male homosexual could carry a child to term, despite movies which toyed with the concept of male pregnancy. How would the courts or Congress deal with that inequity? Would volunteers be sought, or surrogate mothers assigned to the duty through some draft system?

    Platitudes and wishes don't make a marriage, a man and woman do, when joined together in the Holy Sacrament. It is called "Holy" because it was mandated in our religious belief systems by the Almighty. It is impossible for that to apply to same sex couples, period! There is no "hatred or fear" involved here. There is a bioligical chasm which cannot be overcome in order to allow natural childbirth to ensue from the exclusive sexual union of same sex partners.

    Homophobic is not the correct word to use in this case. Please find another word, and try again.

    Semper Fi!
    namgrunt


  9. #9
    Registered User Free Member cmbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    120
    Credits
    979
    Savings
    0
    All fags should be thrown out on a deserted island far far away from everyone else. Would that wipe out the whole population of San Francisco? I agree with your last post _Greybeard_ What will this world as we know come to?


  10. #10
    It isn't homophobia. It's painful economics.
    Granting official marriage privileges means that a spouse is eligible for benefits--insurance, etc.
    Insurance companies would have to double their payouts, expensive payouts, to marriage partners who have AIDS (mostly gay males despite what they claim), and maternity benefits to women who were artificially inseminated in some manner.
    Who do you think will pay for that in the end as the premiums go up?
    And that's just one wave of a huge ripple effect.


  11. #11
    Very interesting reading ya'll. I wish the Maj. would explain as ya'll do. I don't think I'm Homophobic. I don't dislike Gay/Lesbian people, I dislike their life styles. If God wanted two of the same sex to be partner's, wouldn't he have done it when he put Adam asleep and took a rib, or not take a rib, just made another Man and told Adam, "here's your mate, mate, go forth and have fun."
    God didn't do this. We all have choices. Just like the Bishop of the Episcal Church who "CHOSE" this lifestyle. Leaving a marriage, children, to become a "HOMOSEXUAL?" Love the people, despise the sin. I also know and we've all seen this. A man for example...Shows more of the feminist side, than the Male side. Some sort of goof up in his genes. And he's attracted to men. So he lives a lifestyle like that. I'm not sure if that is wrong. He may not have a choice. But when a straight person goes and does this HOMO thing, I think therein lies the problem. I don't care if they want to be "MARRIED." How does this hurt me? It doesn't. The only thing I can see it may hurt is, our children seeing this at a tender learning age...."Daddy?" "Yes?" "Why are those two men/women kissing?" "I see you and Mommy kissing, is this a game Daddy?" What and how on earth do you say to your child, "Well Son/Daughter, ya see it's like this." "Uh,........I mean how do you tell them?" Later in life they will see this, and hopefully will come to their parents and ask. This is my main concern. Just like this junk music, hip hop, or gangster rap, talkin' 'bout killin', drugs, sex. How do we keep it away from our children? It's legal. I hate it that any candidate would support this. G.W. Bush....If he gets his way there'll be a Constitutional Amendment. But, the gay/lesbian lobbyist will hammer it to death with all sorts of suits, legal battles, from now on.
    Our Society is becomin' so close to the Bible's, Saddom/Gamora, it isn't funny.......I hope all will find peace, happiness, and obey the laws of the land.....


  12. #12

    Prominent gay rights groups

    BigEagle6

    [b]
    I don't care if they want to be "MARRIED." How does this hurt me?
    In your pocket book for one. Just imagine that we say OK you gays can get married in order to benefit on your income tax, you can claim children some that are yours (gay Lesbians can have children, but not by their sex habits). Then you as a single mother can also claim your children. Gay males cannot have children, even with a sex change. I often wonder haw a male could have been married to a woman for 20 years have children and grandchildren and all of a sudden say hey guess what, I am gay! I am guessing that one of the reasons for this rush into marriage is that the gays think that Kerry will get elected to the office of the Presidency and will repel the Bush tax plan, this way they will benefit more than you and I, Just a guess.

    Attached Images Attached Images

  13. #13

    homophobic

    namgrunt
    Please define your understanding of what "homophobic" means


    {b]"Homophobia" irrational hatred or fear of homosexuals or homosexuality n.--ho-mo-pho'.bic (-fo'bik) adj.[/b]

    Attached Images Attached Images

  14. #14

    Gay rights and My rights

    This will refer to married and single home owners, straight or Homosexual without children. In all of the States that I have lived in and have been a home owner; I have had to pay School Taxes even if I didn't have a child going to school. Then the ones who rented a home with a child going to school didn't have to pay School Taxes. Why do I have to pay for someone's else Child to go to School? I feel that it would be more fair to have a school Tax added to the sale Tax to pay for this, that way everyone would have to pay some part of the School Tax that only home owners are paying. The school Tax should be abolished from City taxes.


  15. #15
    Gunny

    Your dictionary definition is the one I'm familiar with. I think I used the correct words except for not including "irrational" in the sentence.

    Either way, I don't support same sex marriages under any circumstance, Period. It is politics for power gain. Next thing you know, someone will show up with an Irish Setter or a Ewe, and want a marriage license.

    To carry it to an extreme, what if someone is in love with their job? Can they "marry" their job, and force the company to keep them employed, regardless of their skills (or lack of) in performing that work? You would end up with a labor union shotgun wedding. Not a happy thought.

    Where will the Politically Correct adjustments end? The cosmos would be the limit, if you could reach the edges.

    Semper Fi!


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not Create Posts
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts