Gay Marriage

[RJBKJB]

gov. richardson is passing a bill in the house that would make gay marriage legal in nm. and we have heard nothing from the media.

[Sunny Delight]

Nor will we, as the media is behind this bill in every state in the Union. The only time the media reports on events is when those who are gay end up being threatened or hurt by someone who isn't. We do not get to hear about the crimes that those who are gay commit against the heterasexual public.

[AbqKathleen]

http://www.topix.net/forum/source/kob-new-mex...

[Lobo Viejo]

Sunny Delight wrote:

Nor will we, as the media is behind this bill in every state in the Union. The only time the media reports on events is when those who are gay end up being threatened or hurt by someone who isn't. We do not get to hear about the crimes that those who are gay commit against the heterasexual public.

This is incorrect. There was substantial publicity about the crimes of the closted gay Republicans in Congress, Foley and Craig, as well as the gay pedophiles here in N.M. that were prosecuted. What other crimes are you talking about?

[CornDaddy]

Why do they need special treatment? This isn't about love, its about the money, as has already been shown in the other thread.

[enough already]

CornDaddy wrote:

Why do they need special treatment? This isn't about love, its about the money, as has already been shown in the other thread.

Come on, are you afraid they're getting something more than you are? They work, pay taxes and contribute to society, they've just made different choices than yours. What you're trying to do is make them second choice citizens and that's not your right.

[AbqKathleen]

Lobo Viejo wrote:

<quoted text>
This is incorrect. There was substantial publicity about the crimes of the closted gay Republicans in Congress, Foley and Craig, as well as the gay pedophiles here in N.M. that were prosecuted. What other crimes are you talking about?

I could not agree more.

I think there have been some pretty blatent attempts by the media (and the public) to make a person's sexuality a bigger part of a story than it needs to be.

[Sunny Delight]

Lobo Viejo wrote:

<quoted text>
This is incorrect. There was substantial publicity about the crimes of the closted gay Republicans in Congress, Foley and Craig, as well as the gay pedophiles here in N.M. that were prosecuted. What other crimes are you talking about?

THe crimes that took place in California against the average person living there!

[enough already]

Sunny Delight wrote:

<quoted text>
THe crimes that took place in California against the average person living there!

State the crimes and who commited them, some specifics.

[Bluntly Spoken]

What one does in their home is their business, what one does in public becomes everyones business.

I have nothing against homosexuals,(sorry but they stole the word "gay" from the true meaning and I don't accept that to identify them.

The true cost and meaning to this is they demand to have what they legally are not entitled to, same things as a man and wife are.

I say let them live together if they want to, who cares but when it comes to marriage, I don't think so.

I bet most of their relatives would not approve of it either even if they openly say we are happy for you.

The hidden cost in insurance and other things has never been made public but I am sure it cost a lot more to offer them the same simply because they are both of the same sex.

And I am not a believer all were born homosexual, some yes, all no.

And don't even try to tell me that if they want kids those kids will not be influences by both parents being the same sex.

How about a law forbidden same sex couples from adopting? I know it was struck down in the courts and that was wrong UNLESS they must take mixed blood kids or those from broken homes etc.

I can go on and on as I am not in favor of homosexual marriages.

And I have know homosexuals and they know my feelings yet we still have remained friends.

Anyone here dare to come out of the closet and post you are a homosexual?

[Eltorro]

The homosexual/lesbian crowd have a strong special interest lobby going for them. Why you ask? Because the homosexual/lesbian crowd throw money at the legislatures and the payback is to pass laws in favor of homosexual/lesbians.

If the homosexual/lesbian crowd wants to get married then follow the legal rules of the land. Put it up for a general vote and let the people decide. Do not let the paid prostitutes of our state legislature with heavy debt to special interest groups make those decisions.

BTW: Where in our constitution does it say that homosexual/lesbian type people have more rights than anyone else? No where that I've read. Sexuality is NOT a constitutional right. Try reading the literature before claiming something someone else said as gosphel. What a bunch of pathetic losers the homosexaul/lesbian crowd really are.

[Bluntly Spoken]

Eltorro wrote:

The homosexual/lesbian crowd have a strong special interest lobby going for them. Why you ask? Because the homosexual/lesbian crowd throw money at the legislatures and the payback is to pass laws in favor of homosexual/lesbians.
If the homosexual/lesbian crowd wants to get married then follow the legal rules of the land. Put it up for a general vote and let the people decide. Do not let the paid prostitutes of our state legislature with heavy debt to special interest groups make those decisions.
BTW: Where in our constitution does it say that homosexual/lesbian type people have more rights than anyone else? No where that I've read. Sexuality is NOT a constitutional right. Try reading the literature before claiming something someone else said as gosphel. What a bunch of pathetic losers the homosexaul/lesbian crowd really are.

Keep in mind there are more homosexual in politics now too and that Hollywood has always had many of them and they have the money to spend on those lobbyist.

Your right about that too.

Best thing for them is to go about their lives as they have and no one will bother them.

I see them working at Home Depot, Lowe's, Chili's , Albertson's, K-mart and many other businesses but have not seen any working for Wal-Mart. If they are then they do a heck of a job hiding their lifestyle.

By the way no need to say lesbian as homosexual covers all of them.

[just wondering]

Bluntly Spoken wrote:

<quoted text>
Keep in mind there are more homosexual in politics now too and that Hollywood has always had many of them and they have the money to spend on those lobbyist.
Your right about that too.
Best thing for them is to go about their lives as they have and no one will bother them.
I see them working at Home Depot, Lowe's, Chili's , Albertson's, K-mart and many other businesses but have not seen any working for Wal-Mart. If they are then they do a heck of a job hiding their lifestyle.
By the way no need to say lesbian as homosexual covers all of them.

And I am sure with all of your worldly knowledge and your superior "gaydar" that walking through Walmart you can tell who is gay or not. You really have some kind of nerve to even make a comment like that.

Though I am not gay and happily married, I have many friends that are. They do not wear feather boas, or think everything is FABU, get over your 1970's, Village People, San Fransico stero typing and remain happy and healthy in your own life with your own friends and family. Stop trying to throw your thoughts about how a person acts equals their life style. It really is not for you or me to worry about!

[just wondering]

Eltorro wrote:

The homosexual/lesbian crowd have a strong special interest lobby going for them. Why you ask? Because the homosexual/lesbian crowd throw money at the legislatures and the payback is to pass laws in favor of homosexual/lesbians.
If the homosexual/lesbian crowd wants to get married then follow the legal rules of the land. Put it up for a general vote and let the people decide. Do not let the paid prostitutes of our state legislature with heavy debt to special interest groups make those decisions.
BTW: Where in our constitution does it say that homosexual/lesbian type people have more rights than anyone else? No where that I've read. Sexuality is NOT a constitutional right. Try reading the literature before claiming something someone else said as gosphel. What a bunch of pathetic losers the homosexaul/lesbian crowd really are.

Ah yes.... but when was there ever a vote on when a man and a woman could get married?

Though I totally agree with you on the point that a lot of money is thrown in the political ring to support their cause, the world is not going to end tomorrow if gays and lesbians get married to one another.

The country and the world is a changing. We have our first African American President in the White House, the econonmy is on the verge of entering the fine line between recession and depression.

I personally am more worried if I am going to keep my job, house, food on the table, and provide a good life for my family now than I am if Bob and John or Sue and Mary want to get married.

Taking a vote on how to get the country out of this financial disaster is to me more important than gay marriage.

[know it all]

Bluntly Spoken wrote:

<quoted text>
Keep in mind there are more homosexual in politics now too and that Hollywood has always had many of them and they have the money to spend on those lobbyist.
Your right about that too.
Best thing for them is to go about their lives as they have and no one will bother them.
I see them working at Home Depot, Lowe's, Chili's , Albertson's, K-mart and many other businesses but have not seen any working for Wal-Mart. If they are then they do a heck of a job hiding their lifestyle.
By the way no need to say lesbian as homosexual covers all of them.

How ignorant and closed minded can anyone be, is this what you really do with your time? Go to Walmart and all the other stores and try to figure out who's homosexual??

You are the true example of "Get A Life Bud!" Deal with it, you and your kind need to get a grip! You don't know it all, you only sound well, kind of backward.

[Bluntly Spoken]

just wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
Ah yes.... but when was there ever a vote on when a man and a woman could get married?
Though I totally agree with you on the point that a lot of money is thrown in the political ring to support their cause, the world is not going to end tomorrow if gays and lesbians get married to one another.
The country and the world is a changing. We have our first African American President in the White House, the econonmy is on the verge of entering the fine line between recession and depression.
I personally am more worried if I am going to keep my job, house, food on the table, and provide a good life for my family now than I am if Bob and John or Sue and Mary want to get married.
Taking a vote on how to get the country out of this financial disaster is to me more important than gay marriage.

For all my rhetoric on homosexuals and President Obama I have to agree 100% with you here.

However I also will say that part of our countries problems are due to BIG business and now cities, countries, states and even the federal governments OUTSOURCING work to India and a couple other countries.

Stop the outsourcing and bring those jobs back to the USA will or should be a primary issue with President Obama and will go a long ways towards bringing this country back on its own feet.

As to whether or not it was ever put to vote, some states have voted on homosexual marriages and voted NO, only a man and woman make a couple allowed to marry and the homosexual lobbies have taken every one of those states to courts.

Have to remember here too that Judges as well as others are homosexuals too, no not all of them are but some and they shop one of their own to hold the trail in that court room.

Now back to figuring out how to hold onto what we have.

[Bluntly Spoken]

just wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
And I am sure with all of your worldly knowledge and your superior "gaydar" that walking through Walmart you can tell who is gay or not. You really have some kind of nerve to even make a comment like that.
Though I am not gay and happily married, I have many friends that are. They do not wear feather boas, or think everything is FABU, get over your 1970's, Village People, San Fransico stero typing and remain happy and healthy in your own life with your own friends and family. Stop trying to throw your thoughts about how a person acts equals their life style. It really is not for you or me to worry about!

You must be nuts to not be able to notice them, sure some dress, walk and talk like anyone else but many do give themselves away.

How many know that the half rainbow means they are homosexual? and to tattoo it on your arm or ankle is a dead giveaway. I won't even go into all the other ways I can spot some, not all mind you but enough of them, that does not mean I don't agree with how they chose to live, as I said what you do in your home is your business, what you do in public becomes everyones business.

I have friends in that lifestyle too and we all get alone well.

Sterotype them, never, walking with feather , oh please.

And I don't worry about how they, you or others live, do what you want, its your life.

Give it a rest ok and I will too.

[CornDaddy]

enough already wrote:

<quoted text>
Come on, are you afraid they're getting something more than you are? They work, pay taxes and contribute to society, they've just made different choices than yours. What you're trying to do is make them second choice citizens and that's not your right.

Your assessment of my post shows your ignorance. Nobody but you made reference to 2nd class citizens.

Why should 'they' be granted special privileges when compared to the rest of society just because as you say 'they made different choices'?

[GOOD GRIEF]

Sunny Delight wrote:

<quoted text>
THe crimes that took place in California against the average person living there!

You're a piece of work! I lived in California for over 20 years & never had a crime committed against me by a gay person nor do I recall reading about anybody that did in the newspapers. What crimes are you talking about? I'm straight but am more concerned over the stability of somebody who is homophobic than I am about somebody's sexual preference which is nobody's business as far as I'm concerned!

[-molly-]

just wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
Ah yes.... but when was there ever a vote on when a man and a woman could get married?
Though I totally agree with you on the point that a lot of money is thrown in the political ring to support their cause, the world is not going to end tomorrow if gays and lesbians get married to one another.
The country and the world is a changing. We have our first African American President in the White House, the econonmy is on the verge of entering the fine line between recession and depression.
I personally am more worried if I am going to keep my job, house, food on the table, and provide a good life for my family now than I am if Bob and John or Sue and Mary want to get married.
Taking a vote on how to get the country out of this financial disaster is to me more important than gay marriage.

Here here! I agree TOTALLY! Bigger problems to solve. Let's just concentrate on what's at hand, um, like the economy perhaps. That's a nice place to start!!