|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:57 am
Oh God. Thank god(/ess/s/esses) that it didn't pass. My God.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 11:10 pm
OMG!! Thank goodness. It would have been horrible!! I've got a friend who's planning on going to Canada to get married to her girlfriend of 3 years!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 12:38 am
Bah! This whole thing gives me one. Giant. Headache!
They claim that they're trying to protect the "sanctity of marriage"...little newsflash here!
#1 - Drive-thru chapels and Elvis, two things that disrupt the "sanctity" but are still suprisingly legal AND popular!
#2 - Since when did our country stop seperating Church and State? (answering my own question - CHRISTMAS AT THE WHITEHOUSE! With Dubbya Frickin' Bush!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:28 am
Saknika Yeah, here's the article I got off my Roadrunner home page. Quote: ~snip~ "We're making progress, and we're not going to stop until marriage between a man and a woman is protected," said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas. "We have 45 states that have defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman," Brownback said. "Since the last time we voted in the Senate, we've seen a total of 14 states take this issue up on the ballot -- on the ballot -- and you've got another seven set for this fall." ~snip~ ~More snippage~ ... But Senator Brokeback! It IS protect! No one's questioning YOUR right to marry a person of the opposite gender! And further more, great, you have 45 states on it. Can't you just let the other five be? Leave it up to the states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 5:35 am
You know, I think we should all save up and buy Bush a Bible.
That retard isn't protecting the sanctity of marriage at all, instead he is merely enforcing a false public belief. In by doing so, he is actually going well against what he aims to do.
I've said it once and I'll hapilly say it again; God does not have a problem with Homosexuality. Henceforth, marriage should not be strictly between Hetrosexual couples, it should be for everyone.
He's trying to falsely "protect" something that he doesn't even comprehend, and truthfully, probably never will.
To be absolutely blunt, that B_____d makes me sick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:29 am
The worse thing just happened! crying New York State's highest Court, the Court of Appeals has ruled that Gay Marriage is not allowed in New York state at all. gonk I can't believe they made that ruling. That proves that this state government is full of it. They cliam the NY is a very liberal state, and its even stupider because we have one of the biggest populations of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people next to San Fransico. I still can't believe that they did that!! I am so pissed!! scream scream
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 06, 2006 8:15 am
Well, really all the court said was "Gay marriage, the prospects thereof, are not supported by New York law; which defines marriage as strictly between a man and a woman" They can't rule that gay marriage is OK if the state's legislature has passed a law that specifically states that marriage is between a man and a woman, but one of the judges did say that "Although what future generations will think is unkown, we know now that the people of this era should be making the decisions regarding issues of this nature through their legislatures", in other words, the courts have no place in making such a ruling; people should elect their legislatures to make laws that they approve of.
Not to mention that NY is the home of the CPUSA biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
