Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash...

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

There are 17554 comments on the NBC Chicago story from Jan 7, 2013, titled Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes. In it, NBC Chicago reports that:

Leaders of several Chicago-area African American churches on Monday urged state lawmakers to vote against pending legislation that would allow same-sex marriage in Illinois.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NBC Chicago.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Level 9

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#16265 Feb 2, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Every child raised by a same sex couple is either motherless or fatherless.
Is there a worse way to redefine marriage than to ensure children raised without mothers or fathers?
Sorry but there are many children raised without mothers or father.....why AREN'T you concerned about them? Why are you ONLY upset when the parents happen to be a Same-Sex Couple? And what business is it yours ANYWAYS?

Again, this argument has failed in recent Court cases and it will continue to fail because the sexual orientation of the parents DOESN'T indicate that the child's well being is being harmed......and besides just because a child is raised by their mother and father DOESN'T mean they will be raised efficiently!!!

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#16267 Feb 2, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Every child raised by a same sex couple is either motherless or fatherless.
Is there a worse way to redefine marriage than to ensure children raised without mothers or fathers?
Every child raised by a single parent is motherless or fatherless, yet the state does not intervene.

Did you have a point, or were you merely reaffirming that you aren't terribly intelligent?

“Equality for ALL”

Level 2

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#16268 Feb 2, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Every child raised by a same sex couple is either motherless or fatherless.
Is there a worse way to redefine marriage than to ensure children raised without mothers or fathers?
It was those children being raised by same-sex parents that was one of the reasons the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found denying civil marriages to the parents unconstitutional; Goodridge (2003). i.e.: The court found that those children actually supported the right to marry to same-sex families, completely opposite to what you espouse.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#16270 Feb 2, 2014
Willie Lynch III wrote:
<quoted text>Probably because they're (the only ones) subjecting those kids to that dilemma INTENTIONALLY.
Really? Single women who choose to have babies are not denying their child a father? Single men who adopt from the foster care system are not denying a child a mother?
None of the children who same-sex couples adopt every had any prospect of living with their biological parents, anyway. And if other qualified couples had wanted to adopt them, they would have.
The children of same-sex couples were denied a father and mother before the same-sex couples generously adopted them.

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16271 Feb 2, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Every child raised by a same sex couple is either motherless or fatherless.
Is there a worse way to redefine marriage than to ensure children raised without mothers or fathers?
Not at all.

Are you implying that SSM impacts this in any way?

Prove it.

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16272 Feb 2, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Every child raised by a single parent is motherless or fatherless, yet the state does not intervene.
Did you have a point, or were you merely reaffirming that you aren't terribly intelligent?
Exactly.

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16273 Feb 2, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Every child raised by a same sex couple is either motherless or fatherless.
Is there a worse way to redefine marriage than to ensure children raised without mothers or fathers?
Let's look at it a different way Brian. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by a gay couple who provide a loving and caring home. Would you say those children are better off in the abusive junkie home? Are you kidding Brian?
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#16274 Feb 2, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at it a different way Brian. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by a gay couple who provide a loving and caring home. Would you say those children are better off in the abusive junkie home? Are you kidding Brian?
Just watched "Bad Grandpa" movie with my 3 grandkids. Funny! Johnny Knoxville of "Jackass". Lots of laughs.

The plot applies, useless lowlife parents.

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16275 Feb 2, 2014
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Just watched "Bad Grandpa" movie with my 3 grandkids. Funny! Johnny Knoxville of "Jackass". Lots of laughs.
The plot applies, useless lowlife parents.
Thank you my friend.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#16276 Feb 2, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you my friend.
The mom was going to prison, the dad was a lowlife tweaker who just wanted the kid for the $600 month child support the kid was 8 years old. Grandpa ain't no prize himself but he loves the kid and is his best shot. Nice movie funny too.

“It's Time. . .”

Level 1

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#16277 Feb 2, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at it a different way Brian. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by a gay couple who provide a loving and caring home. Would you say those children are better off in the abusive junkie home? Are you kidding Brian?
Will you stop making sense! Some on here will end up with exploded heads if you continue.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#16278 Feb 2, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
Let's look at it a different way Brian. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by a gay couple who provide a loving and caring home. Would you say those children are better off in the abusive junkie home? Are you kidding Brian?
If you are going to start with an "abusive junkie couple" you have to compare them to an abusive junkie same sex couple. Its fair to compare good parents to a good same sex couple's parenting skills or bad parents to a bad same sex couple's parenting skills. But not fair to compare abusive parents to "a loving and caring home".

Do you have any examples?
Pietro Armando

Clinton, MA

#16279 Feb 3, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at it a different way Brian. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by a gay couple who provide a loving and caring home. Would you say those children are better off in the abusive junkie home? Are you kidding Brian?
Let's look at it a different way Wastey. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by an opposite sex married couple who provide a loving and caring home.

The children are better off if they are removed from an abusive situation and placed in a better home, period.

The point is, children, as we all once were, are better off with their own married biological mother and father in a stable home.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#16280 Feb 3, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>If you are going to start with an "abusive junkie couple" you have to compare them to an abusive junkie same sex couple. Its fair to compare good parents to a good same sex couple's parenting skills or bad parents to a bad same sex couple's parenting skills. But not fair to compare abusive parents to "a loving and caring home".
Do you have any examples?
One of your problems, Brian, is that you refuse to answer two questions that I have asked ad nauseum (in response to your ad nauseum sophistry).

1) What happens to the kids of those junkies and other abusive parents?

2) Where do the same-sex couples get the kids to begin with?

If you answer those two questions, you will find that same-sex parents do not deny even a single child of a mother and father.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Level 1

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#16281 Feb 3, 2014
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's look at it a different way Wastey. Suppose biological children are taken away from an abusive junkie couple. Later those children are adopted by an opposite sex married couple who provide a loving and caring home.
The children are better off if they are removed from an abusive situation and placed in a better home, period.
The point is, children, as we all once were, are better off with their own married biological mother and father in a stable home.
You do realize that your last paragraph completely rejected the second paragraph, don't you? Thank you for proving that your intent is to confuse and to obfuscate. With you types, truth is the last thing you want to get near. It is anathema to you.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Level 1

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#16282 Feb 3, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Conceded, same sex marriage increases entitlement benefit spending. Glad that's settled.
As to whether gays have as much right to benefits meant to encourage fathers and mothers to raise their children together is a matter of debate. Those entitlements weren't voted into law when two men were considered married; when did rewriting marriage law based on sexual orientation become a right?
What marriage law has been rewritten Brian? Present this law.

**crickets chirping**
Brian_G wrote:
I support human rights and gays are human too. I just don't support the right of a minority group to redefine marriage against the will of the majority, as in Utah, Oklahoma, California, Iowa and Massachusetts. Let people write law not unelected unaccountable elitist judges overturning lawful elections.
"People" don't get to write unconstitutional laws. That's why we have a judicial branch. So sorry you don't like the U.S. government. Perhaps you should move to a theocratic country. You won't be missed.

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#16283 Feb 3, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
If you are going to start with an "abusive junkie couple" you have to compare them to an abusive junkie same sex couple. Its fair to compare good parents to a good same sex couple's parenting skills or bad parents to a bad same sex couple's parenting skills. But not fair to compare abusive parents to "a loving and caring home".
Do you have any examples?
Actually, no you don't. You see, the state intervenes in the case of the "abusive junky couple" it does not in the case of a same sex couple.

The benchmarks for state intervention are clear, and simply being gay isn't one of them.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Level 1

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#16284 Feb 3, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>We can negotiate cutting entitlement spending but that doesn't change the fact:
Marriage entitlements were voted into law when marriage was male/female, not when it was male/male or female/female. Those entitlements weren't intended for same sex couples.
Same sex marriage means higher deficit spending because of increased entitlements.
Doesn't everyone love the way that Brian speaks out of both sides of his mouth?!!!!!

Brian is on record as saying that he fully supports civil unions for gays, because they would give gays the same entitlements and privileges of marriage, without using the word!!!!! Now he turns around and pretends his argument is based upon those entitlements and says we are not worthy of them!!!!!!

So which is it Brian_G? Are we entitled to receive these benefits through "civil unions" or are we not entitled to them at all??!! Make up your mind moron!!!!!

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16285 Feb 3, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>If you are going to start with an "abusive junkie couple" you have to compare them to an abusive junkie same sex couple. Its fair to compare good parents to a good same sex couple's parenting skills or bad parents to a bad same sex couple's parenting skills. But not fair to compare abusive parents to "a loving and caring home".
Do you have any examples?
Now you are on the right track Brian. Why not look at marriage and family as those who provide good homes? Seems like you agree; many biological parents are unfit. There is no advantage to promoting abusive parents simply because they happen to be biologically related. How does abuse of loving same sex families achieve anything positive Brian?

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#16286 Feb 3, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>If you are going to start with an "abusive junkie couple" you have to compare them to an abusive junkie same sex couple. Its fair to compare good parents to a good same sex couple's parenting skills or bad parents to a bad same sex couple's parenting skills. But not fair to compare abusive parents to "a loving and caring home".
Do you have any examples?
Here are some stats Brian.

According to NCANDS whose latest statistics are for 2005 an estimated 3.3 million referrals of child abuse or neglect were received by public social service or CPS agencies. Of these referrals, 899,000 children were confirmed to be victims of abuse or neglect (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007). That means about 12 out of every 1,000 children up to age 18 in the United States were found to be victims of maltreatment in 2005 (USDHHS, 2007).

http://www.americanhumane.org/children/stop-c...

Millions of children were removed from the care of biological parents Brian.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min TRUMP WINNERS 1,457,295
Kellyann Conway destroys big mouth Clinton aide 18 min ugly monkeys 4
Oh my God. A mouse just ran in my bedroom. 20 min Drilling for the ... 59
Chelsea Clinton sports inverted cross? 39 min Hadleycus of Greece 1
Should some states merge? 41 min Drilling for the ... 8
Proof to support the claim that the true Hebrew... (May '13) 1 hr Slimshady7 353
3 White Teens Arrested in Gang Rape of 13 yo 1 hr facts 31
the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08) 1 hr Powertoafrica 50,526
8 yo Girl Kidnapped, [email protected], & Murdered While Sh... 3 hr RoofisSezDownBoie... 82
Thanksgiving is a WHITES ONLY holiday! 3 hr Barros 244
More from around the web