posted on August 4, 2003 12:40:39 AM new
I have been reading a lot on the boards lately about gay marriage, the president being a liar and the war. I have come to the personal conclusion that many AMERICANS are very confused, morally lost and have forgotten what it means to be an American. Also, what a privilege it is to be an American. Most importantly the fact that America was founded under GOD.
Does anyone remember "One Nation Under GOD Indivisible with Liberty and Justice for all"
Over time there are some who want to change that fact because they may not believe in GOD or JESUS, but just since they do not does not mean that the rest of us should have to compromise our beliefs and what our country stands for. If someone does not believe in GOD then that's there right, but they should not be trying to change this great country from how it all started. The separation of GOD and state is something that is just not completely possible to do, but some will still try and I believe if anything will be our downfall it will be just that if it continues. If you believe in GOD and follow the bible that is just what you are supposed to do, follow the bible. Not make changes to it at will because you are in government and it will bring you votes. I applaud President Bush for his stern commitment to GOD and trying to do the right thing. It is very refreshing. He is a Christian and also the president, but that does mean he should give up his values and or religion.
Marriage is a union between a man and a women, plain and simple. If someone chooses to live a life style to be with someone of the same sex as them, then that is there right here in America. It is not there right to be legally married. It should not change because some are confused about there sexuality. I hope not to sound like a gay/lesbian basher, but I think most normal minded people (no matter there religion) know that it is just not normal for the same sex to be together. It just was not meant to be, but as I said before, here in America that is there right. I just don't think the rest of us should have to compromise our religion, life style or our countries laws to appease them.
As far as the war and the so called lies claimed by the democrats. It is nonsense! The president and the white house from the beginning had more than the nuclear threat reason as to why we should go to Iraq. The nuclear threat seemed to have been there main reason, but not the onlyone. The weapons will be found in time and the proof that there was an immanent threat, but in the mean time lets not forget the little fact that sadom is a ruthless murderer (the likes of hitler) and was killing even his own people in horrible ways. We have a moral reason for being there as well and the immanent threat to America to find nuclear weapons. If we wanted to steal there oil we could have done that will a long time ago. Please people, stop playing that old card already. That is to simple of an argument to use to try and make our president look bad just because he is not of your (democrat) party. I used to kind of consider myself a democrat, but was never completely committed to anyone party. Then after way too many years of Clinton I was on my way to the republican party almost for sure. The icing on the cake is the way the democrats have been acting since President Bush got into to office. It has just pushed me a lot faster into the "RIGHT" party. You want to talk about lies. Come on already! They will say anything to make the president look bad and it seems as though there is no bottom for them at this point.
It is one thing to not agree with your president, but some of things said on national TV about him are just down right disrespectful. I am not saying that you should not be able to exercise freedom of speech towards our president or anyone else for that matter, but Lets not forget he is the leader of our country right now and it makes us as a country vulnerable to say the least. If you don't like President Bush that then try to elect someone else for next term. Although it very unlikely, you could try! In the mean time try using some common sense about what is really going on in the world and not just blindly following the "LEFT" because they say so. Be your own person and think for yourself.
I am a first time poster to the board and ask if anyone cares to respond, be kind about it and leave out the foul language!
posted on August 4, 2003 04:46:37 AM new
This board is made up of many opinions and everyone here will voice their opinions. You may not like the style they choose to use. What the he**. I can't help myself. My opinion follows:
#1. Our president is a liar. No news there. Hopefully, there isn't a tremendous number of niave followers of the regime as you. So, everyone else is lying and the president is telling the truth? So, because he is our president, we are supposed to be respectful and disregard the damage he has caused in this country? It would be best to remove the blinders before you crash into a wall.
#2. My brother is gay and I am neither ashamed or disgusted by it. In fact, I'm proud that he's being who he is. MY BROTHER IS GAY and I love him more for being honest than I would if he were in the closet. So, when you gay bash (and that is exactly what you are doing) you are insulting a great many people that make up this country and some that post on this board. That, in my opionion, is UN-AMERICAN.
#3. About the only place they've found even biological weapons are. . .can you guess? HERE in the good old innocent U S of A. That's where.
Shall I go on? I can, you know. I'll let the rest of the members take over from here. Yes, you'll have some people agree with you. . .twelvepole comes immediately to mind. But, you will find a great many people who don't.
if anyone cares to respond, be kind about it and leave out the foul language
We shall be as kind as you. . .
Cheryl
Power to the people. Power to the people, right on. - John Lennon
[ edited by CBlev65252 on Aug 4, 2003 04:47 AM ]
posted on August 4, 2003 06:30:41 AM new
Cheryl - Gay bashing??? I disagree. Think maybe you're being a little over-sensitive on the issue [in this case].
Stating one does not agree with gays [etc] marrying, is not gay bashing. Nothing hateful was said, in johns commentes] against gays, only an opinion was shared.
----------
johncino - Please remember that quite a few of the posters here are not just liberals they are very, very far 'left' liberals. IMO, a couple come across as Socialists, pure and simple. Again, IMO, that's why the democratic party, who now hold Dean as their top running candidate are pushing their party too far left and won't be elected in 2004.
posted on August 4, 2003 06:55:24 AM new
johncino,
You seem to broach all issues in your thread.
I was just reading an article this morning about Americans who believe all messages emanating from the White House. For example, they believe that weapons of mass destruction actually exist and, as you write in your introduction, that weapons of imminent destruction existed and that these weapons which could be deployed in only 45 minutes will be found SOMEDAY. The article that I mentioned is titled, Functionally Insane Americans by David McGowan.
I'm sorry that you found it necessary to caution us to "be kind and to leave out the foul language". Those instructions cramp my style.
posted on August 4, 2003 07:30:33 AM new"Stating one does not agree with gays [etc] marrying, is not gay bashing. Nothing hateful was said, in johns commentes] against gays, only an opinion was shared." Linda
John states,
"it is just not normal for the same sex to be together. It just was not meant to be, but as I said before, here in America that is there right. I just don't think the rest of us should have to compromise our religion, life style or our countries laws to appease them."
Linda, It sounds hateful to me. When he bases his belief on religion and by the way, a religion in which Cheryl has professed her faith, he is pointing toward the issue that Bush proclaimed, "SIN".
Helen
ed. to add quotation marks.
[ edited by Helenjw on Aug 4, 2003 08:50 AM ]
posted on August 4, 2003 08:39:47 AM new
You do not have to compromise your religion, lifestyle or whatever. No one is insisting that your church sanction any union. What is being demanded is simply equality under the law. That a civil contract be available to couples without regard to their sexual preference. That they be treated fairly as loyal citizens and taxpayers and be given the same protection under the law as all other citizens. I was never married in a church as I am a member of no church. I was married in Chambers by an officer of the court, there was no mention of God in the ceremony. All these people are asking for is the same rights as I have which are granted under our constitution. To deny them their legal rights denies my right to live in a free society.
Your question regarding Liberty and Justice for all should be addressed to the right wing ideologs running this country.
posted on August 4, 2003 09:14:28 AM new
davebraun - Do you also hold the opinion that men [or women] should be allowed to marry more than one person? Should underage children be allowed to be married to older spouses? Should first cousins be allowed to marry?
"No one is insisting that your church sanction any union. What is being demanded is simply equality under the law. I've never bought that argument. Gays, etc can set up wills, make financial arrangements,set their beneficiaries to be anyone they wish, decide who has the say so in medical decisions for them, and in a lot of states even have medical coverage for them as a 'domestic partner'. They can make whatever sort of 'commitment' to one another that they wish to....without needing the approval of the government to change what the term 'marriage' has always been.
posted on August 4, 2003 09:32:54 AM new
LInda - I have a question that maybe you can help me with. Why is it that whenever the subject of Gay Marriage is brought up it's detractors, rather than deal with the actual issues of the topic, sidetrack it with talk of bigamy and incest? What do they have to do with each other?
Gay Marriage is about gaining the same legal rights as a traditional marriage couple. Rights such as surviviors benefits, a say in medical situations, etc. It's not about a stamp of morality or acceptence, it's about aknowledging, even if you are unable to accept, that to legally concenting adults in a long term committed relationship deserve the same legal protections as any heterosexual couple.
In my opinion, because there does not seem to be a logical legal leg to stanf on in barring these types of unions, it's detractors have tried to blur the issue by bringing in unrelated issues and attempting to link them as though they are a row of dominos.
Since you have also done this. What is it that you feel is the common linking trait between the illegal acts of incest, bigamy, and molestation and a homosexual couple. Why do you think that legalizing gay unions will suddenly make these acts legal and even encourage unions resulting from them?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really Common Sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 4, 2003 09:56:01 AM new
fenix - I don't believe I 'side tracked' anything. I answered why I don't buy the argument. I believe that marriage has always been a union between one man and one woman. That has been by a civil marriage or a religious church marriage. I would personally like to see it stay that way.
There are many minority groups that would like to see our current laws changed to give them priviledges they feel they don't currently have. My position is that the arguments used, as you also question...survivor benefits, medical say so....are already addressed in ways other than legalizing gay [etc.] marriage.
Did my questioning dave on his opinions of the other groups that would also like to have their points of view inacted as law imply that by legalizing gay marriage, those too would be up for consideration?
posted on August 4, 2003 10:12:30 AM new
Abraham a well respected figure in the Bible had two wives. There are Christian polygamists living in the Great State of Utah. Jerry Lee Lewis, a Christian married his 15 year old cousin. Many religions sanction polygamy.
To the point I'm not sure what definition you are addressing as underage children. If it is the age of legal consent in the state they reside I am in agreement and do not support marrying underage children. With regard to multiple spouses, if all the parties involved are confortable in a relationship involving multiple partners and as it does not have any affect on those outside of the union it really is not my concern. Whether in Utah, Arabia or next door in my neighbors home.
Your comments are nothing more than red herrings designed to confuse the subject.
In the legal system we enjoy the sanction of the state is needed in many legal matters which occur in the course of a lifetime. From medical decisions, to taxes, to the inclusion in pension plans, insurance, vesting of community property and many other area we encounter in our daily life. The rights you enjoy are denied to a large segment of our population. That is not right.
posted on August 4, 2003 10:14:23 AM new
Whatever happened to separation of church and state? It seems to me this issue is in direct violation when you use religion to base all of this on (gay marriage). Religion must be kept out of it all. If this country were one religion and everyone in this country practiced that religion then, and only then, would I think the two (church and state) should be blended together. We are a multi-cultural, multi-religious country. We have people who are Athiest, Buddhist, Musleum, Baptist, Catholic, Methodist and the list goes on and on. Every law enacted in this country affects each and every member of all the religions practiced in this country in a different way. In order for this to be a fair country where people are treated equally, religion must be kept out of it all.
It's those on the right that insist on bringing religion into the discussions and decisions made by this government. What if my religion condones gay marriage (and it does, by the way)? Does that make your religion more right than mine because you happen to disagree with it? Is that the definition of equality in your book?
Like I have said many, many times before: each person living on the face of this earth whether they be black or white or purple; whether they are religious or non-religious, straight or gay, each and every person has the same right to the pursuit of happiness as you or I. If that includes gay marriage, then what gives any one religious group the right to put the kibosh on it? This is not the UK where the church runs the show. This is American where WE run the show (or at least we used to).
Cheryl
Power to the people. Power to the people, right on. - John Lennon
posted on August 4, 2003 10:17:29 AM new
Why would they be up for question Linda? Those relationships are not legal. There is nothing illegal about a gay relationship.
Also gay couples do not have defacto survivors rights or medical say in emergency situations such as married couples do. In the case of sudden death without a will a spouse will inherit, a gay partner will be out in the cold. A gay partner can be banned from the hospital by a disapproving family member, a spouse cannot.
I can understand why a church would decide not to honor a gay union however I do not see what the legal issue is.
Sad thing is that it will soon become entangled in a states rights issue if Bush has his way and tries to pass a law making it illegal on a federal level in order to circumvent individual states from making it legal.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really Common Sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 4, 2003 10:30:33 AM new
I will continue to respond to all your comments...but not right now. I'm late for a meeting.
But dave you and fenix said: approximately the same thing:
Gay Marriage is about gaining the same legal rights as a traditional marriage couple. Rights such as survivors benefits, a say in medical situations, etc. It's not about a stamp of morality or acceptance,it's about acknowledging, even if you are unable to accept, that to legally consenting adults in a long term committed relationship deserve the same legal protections as any heterosexual couple.
And what I am saying that my position is, is that marriage is not necessary in order for gays to have these protections under the current laws. If they choose not to financially protect, medically give rights to...etc.. their partners...that's their fault. But I'm asking you to make me aware of what rights married couples have that gays do not have. So far you have listed issues that they can already do legally to insure their partners are protected under the current laws.
The agenda is to change the meaning of marriage from being one man and one woman as is currently the law in our country....not in the bible dave.
A man is dying from AIDS. He's rushed to the intensive care unit of the local hospital. His family is called, his partner is not - no legal obligation to be notified. He hears through the grapevine that his partner is in intensive care unit. However, once he gets there he is denied admittance - not a family member or a legally recognized spouse, no legal obligation to admit him into the room. His partner dies and he never go to even say goodbye. You think God condones that heartlessness? if so, He's not my God.
What of medical benefits? One partner cannot put another on their medical policy because they are not legally married.
A gay couple has the same rights as a heterosexual couple who decided to live together - NONE under the law. I know of a woman who chose to live with a man instead of marrying him (trust me, she had her good reasons). They both had wills, both had life insurance policies. He died, his family contested the will and she got nothing. Zip, nadda, zilch.
It's not only the death or sickness issue. The same as if an unmarried couple live together and break up, one partner can just take everything from the other. Without the benefit of marriage there is not benefit of divorce (if you know what I mean). In other words, there is no legal distribution of belongings or bank accounts or anything else. This matter would have to be taken through the civil courts. Aren't they bogged down enough?
Cheryl
Power to the people. Power to the people, right on. - John Lennon
posted on August 4, 2003 10:57:29 AM new
Linda, The author of this information, Andrew Sullivan, is a conservative but he is in favor of same sex marriages. You will find some information that you are looking for here.
posted on August 4, 2003 11:03:14 AM new
Nobody wants gays to marry because it's against what's in the Bible - NO OTHER REASON. Because people want to go to heaven, they CHOOSE to think of gays as non-human, or an abomination of some kind - like it'll win them some kind of reward points with God. Snap out of it people!!!
(Gephardt and Cheney have gay kids - they should be asked point blank how they feel about gay marraige - that's if you can find Cheney... )
posted on August 4, 2003 11:20:28 AM new
Social Security Survivors Benefits! The same rate structure as any other enjoys with regard to insurance premiums. Automatic coverage when driving your spouses rented car. There are hundreds if not thousands of additional perks given to married couples
posted on August 4, 2003 01:34:02 PM new
Twelve - we are all painfully aware of how immoroal you find homosexuality however the fact remains that it is not illiegal whereas bigamy and incest are therefor when discussing a topic of legal acknowledgement of a union, comparing the law abiding relationship between two homosexuals and illegal incestuos or bigamous relationsships is comparing apples and oranges.
We are dealing in legalities, not morality based soley in religion.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really Common Sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 4, 2003 01:43:46 PM new
Lets get back to this one for a second.....
Does anyone remember "One Nation Under GOD Indivisible with Liberty and Justice for all"
I remember it. It is part of the Pledge of Allegience which was written in 1892 by a Baptist minister and the phrase "under God" was not added until 1954. It's a lovely little tome but has no basis nor influence on the laws of our nation. Our constitution is what we base our laws on and nowhere in that document will you find the word God.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really Common Sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 4, 2003 02:13:25 PM new
As usual - statements by someone who knows no history except what they heard an equally ignorant preacher scream from a pulpit.
It would serve all the preachers right if they force official government recognition of religion - but they only recognize one denomination and ban the rest.
To think the pledge of allegence is from the founding fathers is as ignorant as thinking the King James bible was written by the apostles.
And yes I have heard preachers say that with no humor intended.
posted on August 4, 2003 05:35:09 PM new
Twelve - it is not actually illegal for them to marry. There is no law that is violated by a marriage between a same sex couple. Marriage is simply a legal contract which is not enforcable in any state at this time when between two people of the same sex. That will change and it's going to throw everyone into a tizzy when it does since most if not all states aknowledge contracts legal in the state in which they were entered.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really Common Sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on August 4, 2003 06:00:49 PM new
When god made the world there were no computers, or elctricity. By all means, please feel free to swear off advancements and change. Sign off now. It was nice nowing you.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really Common Sense, why do so few people actually have it?
Linda k- You are right about quite a few of the posters here are not just liberals they are very, very far 'left' liberals. IMO, a couple come across as Socialists, pure and simple. I maybe was unfair by lumping all democrats together. I think most normal minded democrats would be embarrassed by some of these far left comments. I am glad to see some people on this board realize that I am not trying to be hateful.
As for some of the other comments I have read tonight:
Helenjw-
I was just reading an article this morning about Americans who believe all messages emanating from the White House. For example, they believe that weapons of mass destruction actually exist and, as you write in your introduction, that weapons of imminent destruction existed and that these weapons which could be deployed in only 45 minutes will be found SOMEDAY. The article that I mentioned is titled, Functionally Insane Americans by David McGowan.
By the way thanks for the spelling (imminent) correction.
I do believe that to be true and not because the present white house tells me it is true. Rather because the history of Saddom tell me it is true. Even old bill Clinton said it recently in an interview. He said the president did the right thing by going there now. He said when he left office Saddom still had these weapons. I don't know why, but for once he actually said something that made some sense.
Tonight on WABC talk radio. It was said that 30 fighter jets have been found buried in the sand over there. No not old wrecks from a past war, but working jets that where purposely hidden. What makes you think that if Saddom could hid 30 jets in the sand that he could not hide weapons on mass destruction. It is just a matter of time before it is all found. When that happens what will you have to say. I am sure you will come up with some type of excuse to not give our military and president the credit they deserve. The left always does!
CBlev65252-
Hopefully, there isn't a tremendous number of niave followers of the regime as you. So, everyone else is lying and the president is telling the truth? So, because he is our president, we are supposed to be respectful and disregard the damage he has caused in this country? It would be best to remove the blinders before you crash into a wall.
The regime thing is a little played out already. It was not witty when it started and it still isn't.
#1- I never said you should not make comment on the things you don't like about our president. If you feel he has done damage to our country, as wrong as it may be! That is your opinion and by all means speak out. Just be respectful about it. To many people like yourself seem to forget he is the leader of our country and should be treated with some RESPECT. I took my blinders off after sept.11, but I think maybe you have picked them up.
#2- In your opinion I am UN-AMERICAN for giving my opinion on gay marriage, but it is so AMERICAN of you to call our president to call our president a liar. That makes sense! Anyway, you said I was gay bashing. Would I not have had to have made a comment about gays in general to have been gay bashing. I only said that they should not able to be married. I did however say If someone chooses to live a life style to be with someone of the same sex as them, then that is there right here in America. Maybe you did not read it right, but that is what I said. Also, I can see you care a lot about your brother and you should. I just wonder if your brother was not gay if you would still feel the same way about the issue (gay marriage) at hand. Try to see it from my point of view. My religion says it is wrong and I have two small children who are learning our religion daily. There is a gay couple living down the road from me. One of the men was married to a women at some point, but got a divorce. Now they live together with the child from the divorce. They consider themselves married. They are very nice people and are trying to raise the boy best they can. What is it that I should tell my children when they start asking questions about them? Which I now they will. The answer that I think you are going to give me is that I should tell them that they love each other very much and just like your mommy and daddy, they are a family. That all you need is love or something like that. Right! Well, I have to tell you that according to my religion, that is the wrong answer. I will not make changes from the bible and confuse my children. I will tell them the truth and if that is gay bashing from your point of view, then I would rather be called a gay basher than lie to my children.
#3-
I think most people try to separate church and state for the most part, but you cannot expect people who feel very strongly about there religion to just forget about it all together when they are talking politics. That would not make them honest. Actually, it would make them hypocrites.
posted on August 5, 2003 04:46:31 AM new just wonder if your brother was not gay if you would still feel the same way about the issue (gay marriage) at hand.
You really are new to the board, aren't you? Glad you came back to comment.
I have the pleasure of working in an environment where many of our clients are gay. I love each and everyone one of them. So, the answer to your question is yes, I would still feel the same about the issue. Have you taken the time to really get to know someone who is gay? Have you taken the time to sit and listen to the challenges they face everyday?
To know me is to know: 1. I respect a person's right to their religious or non-religious beliefs (from Wicca to Athieism to Catholic to Buddhism). 2. I respect a person's right to live a life they feel is right for them (gay or straight). 3. I honor the differences in us all (black, white, hispanic, asian, arabic - all of them). 4. I respect a person's right to make an informed opinion and decision.
That is why, when you come to my house you may find a Palestinian friend of mine, a gay friend of mine or an African American friend of mine. And yes, even a Republican friend of mine. While we may disagree on many topics, we still love and respect each other.
I sense a great deal of hostility in your posts. If I'm wrong, I will apologize.
I still stand by my feelings that in this multi-cultural, multi-religious country, religion should play no part in politics or law making.
Edited to add: And you should not push your religious beliefs on others.
Cheryl
Power to the people. Power to the people, right on. - John Lennon
[ edited by CBlev65252 on Aug 5, 2003 04:48 AM ]
