Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

Nov 30, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: CBS2

The Illinois House has approved a measure to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples.

Comments (Page 1,609)

Showing posts 32,161 - 32,180 of46,977
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37463
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

KiMare wrote:
Save alot wrote:
This is just not necessary. Marriage is man and woman
<quoted text>
Those are counterfeit marriages. Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a direct defective failure of the primary purpose of evolution.
It's not that complicated...
Smile.
You're that odd smirky/bazinga/lesbian trapped in a man's body thingy, right?

As previously stated on numerous occasions, you should feel free to never respond to my comments.
Samatha

Dallas, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37464
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

6

Dissecting the 'gay' marriage charade

Published: 03/07/2012 at 7:51 PM

Anyone in the United States can participate in the institution of marriage – if they choose to do so.

Homosexuals don’t usually choose to do so because they usually don’t want to be married to members of the opposite sex. But it’s their choice.

So why do homosexual activists make this claim? And how do they get away with making a patently false charge against a 6,000-year-old religious institution and the civil laws that it inspired?

Same-sex marriage advocates no more care about the legality of same-sex marriage than Hamas cares about the creation of a Palestinian state.

Neither is interested in creating something new – something that has never been before. Instead, what same-sex marriage advocates and the terrorists of the Gaza Strip have in common is their desire to destroy something they find repulsive. In Gaza, it’s the Jewish state of Israel. Among homosexual activists, it’s the institution of marriage.

By making the bogus claim that marriage, as it has been known through the eons, is inherently unfair because some people don’t want to participate in it as it has always been defined, homosexual activists are able to establish for themselves what appears to be the political high ground of the victim. In exactly the same way, Arab terrorists are able to portray themselves as the victim by claiming they have been denied a state.

But scratch beneath the surface of these two movements and you will soon learn that their objectives go far beyond same-sex marriage and a Palestinian state.

For instance, let’s examine the logic of the victimization homosexuals claim as the basis for pushing same-sex marriage. If it is true that limiting the definition of marriage to a union between one man and one woman is inherently a violation of civil rights, wouldn’t it also be true that defining marriage as a union between just two people is equally discriminatory?

The advocates of same-sex marriage hate this challenge, because they have no intelligent response to it. By default, a capitulation to the same-sex marriage advocates represents future capitulation to the logic they use. That means support of same-sex marriage, to be consistent, must translate into support of polygamy and group marriages of any combination.

Recently, a columnist for the Huffington Post tried to make the case that, unlike same-sex marriage, which has never existed in the history of the world anywhere at any time, polygamy represents a clear and present danger to society. That’s the distinction, he claimed. He cites one infamous polygamist leader charged with sexual assaults and incest-related felony counts as examples of how this works. Of course, he ignores a virtual epidemic of violence and molestation in the homosexual community in favor of one isolated case in the polygamy community.

Eliyahu Federman also states:“There isn’t a shred of modern sociological evidence to support the claim that gay marriage is harmful to society, whereas there is a plethora of historical and contemporary evidence to illustrate the dangers associated with polygamy.”

Ten years ago, the notion of same-sex marriage was scarcely even discussed, let alone performed. So the absence of a body of evidence is a red herring. In the case of polygamy, however, we have thousands of years of history to examine.

It is amazing how quickly the same-sex marriage advocates have been able to rally support from the media, the cultural establishment, the government elite and the judiciary for a radical social experiment that challenges the fundamental building block of human civilization – the family.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37465
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

8

8

8

Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
You're that odd smirky/bazinga/lesbian trapped in a man's body thingy, right?
As previously stated on numerous occasions, you should feel free to never respond to my comments.
Please keep the hate language to yourself.

You have no logical argument to address the basic essence of marriage. Instead, you try to leap frog over the facts, and dumb down marriage to a friendship and impose it by a twirl of the law.

The end result? The closer this silly imposition gets to reality, they more it's fake identity is exposed.

Smile.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37466
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Samatha wrote:
Homosexuals don’t usually choose to do so because they usually don’t want to be married to members of the opposite sex.
Neither does a straightie want to marry a gay person
.
So now that we're organized; what do we do?

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Feb 13

Is A Reality

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37467
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

7

6

6

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Please keep the hate language to yourself.
You have no logical argument to address the basic essence of marriage. Instead, you try to leap frog over the facts, and dumb down marriage to a friendship and impose it by a twirl of the law.
The end result? The closer this silly imposition gets to reality, they more it's fake identity is exposed.
Smile.
Nobody puts Mangina in a corner!
Ugly CC

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37468
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

8

7

7

I was told I could not have my son because I was a homosexual, but I am not a homosexual. Does this violate my civil liberties? Who are the best gay rights advocates in Illinois? They should have a parade where I live. If they are going after people they wrongfully think are gay, I know they are going after real homosexuals.
G-Wiz

Edwardsville, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37469
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

so gays want what straight people already have right? impossible until scientists make it possible for them to bear children. sorry you guys will have to live in sin until then. waa, we cant be married waaa

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37470
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

Marriage is a fundamental right of the individual, as affirmed 14 times by the Supreme Court. This applies only to humans, not to trees.

Everyone qualifies for fundamental rights by virtue of being alive, though a fundamental right may be denied or delayed, but only if the government can demonstrate a compelling and legitimate government interest for doing so.

Procreation ability, intent, or even desire has never been a requirement for marriage, yet is often offered as an excuse to deny equality, ignoring that gay people do raise children both biologically related or adopted. Denial of equal treatment provides nothing to opposite sex couples, while harming same sex couples needlessly. For these reasons the procreation excuse is irrational.

Prejudice and tradition also fail to qualify as legitimate governmental interests sufficient for denial of equal treatment as required by the 5th and 14th amendments.

“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
Not a Requirement

Tempe, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37471
Feb 4, 2013
 

Judged:

7

7

7

G-Wiz wrote:
so gays want what straight people already have right? impossible until scientists make it possible for them to bear children. sorry you guys will have to live in sin until then. waa, we cant be married waaa
Well golly G-Wiz buddy! I wasn't aware that procreation was a requirement of marriage? Who knew! I guess all those older married couples who can't have kids and couples who decide not to have children will NO longer be allowed to Wed anymore! Now see how stupid you sound? Bone head!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37472
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

6

Not Yet Equal wrote:
Marriage is a fundamental right of the individual, as affirmed 14 times by the Supreme Court. This applies only to humans, not to trees.
Everyone qualifies for fundamental rights by virtue of being alive, though a fundamental right may be denied or delayed, but only if the government can demonstrate a compelling and legitimate government interest for doing so.
Procreation ability, intent, or even desire has never been a requirement for marriage, yet is often offered as an excuse to deny equality, ignoring that gay people do raise children both biologically related or adopted. Denial of equal treatment provides nothing to opposite sex couples, while harming same sex couples needlessly. For these reasons the procreation excuse is irrational.
Prejudice and tradition also fail to qualify as legitimate governmental interests sufficient for denial of equal treatment as required by the 5th and 14th amendments.
“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
You dishonesty is exposed;

SCOTUS affirmed marriage BECAUSE of procreation.

Why is that deception necessary for your argument.

I never said marriage applies to trees. I used the procreation of trees or the lack thereof as an analogy to the procreation or lack thereof with humans.

You know that, but again used deceitful gay twirl to avoid dealing with reality.

Why is that necessary for a legitimate position?

Honest minds want to know. Is that too much for you???

Snicker.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Feb 13

Is A Reality

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37474
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>

Honest minds want to know. Is that too much for you???
Honest minds don't talk about fruits and nuts, and then claim that they're being clever.

Why do you refuse to listen to internal lesbian?
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37475
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

G-Wiz wrote:
so gays want what straight people already have right? impossible until scientists make it possible for them to bear children. sorry you guys will have to live in sin until then. waa, we cant be married waaa
Gays do not have abortions
.
Gays do not use birth control
.
Gays do not have accidental pregnancies
.
Gays 'do' have absolute control over our baby making process without the need for straight people or sorry-ass homophobes; sugar
http://www.quitecurious.com/wp-content/galler...
Andrew Singer

San Luis Obispo, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37476
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
Honest minds don't talk about fruits and nuts, and then claim that they're being clever.
Why do you refuse to listen to internal lesbian?
The factless QUEEN listens to HIS internal lesbian every day, thus explaining his whiny little bitch posts!(S)he is "stamping her wittle feeties" as she reads my post hammering factless' bitchy "wittle" ass this very minute!!

LMFAO!!!

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Feb 13

Is A Reality

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37477
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Andrew Singer wrote:
<quoted text>
The factless QUEEN....
LMFAO!!!
Calling kimare a factless queen is pretty bitchy.

I love it.

His posts are as barren as my mangina.
Illegal

Wilmington, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37479
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Nothing legal about being gay.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37480
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

No US law has ever required procreation ability or intent for marriage.

Several SCOTUS cases affirm procreation is not a requirement for the fundamental right of marriage to remain a fundamental right. Whether or not to procreate is a private decision, beyond the proper reach of the government, and independant of marriage:

Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974):“This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977)(plurality):“[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.”

Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977):“[I]t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.”

Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978):“[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”

Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987):“[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression[] of emotional support and public commitment.”
P
lanned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992):“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116 (1996):“Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
Andrew Singer

San Luis Obispo, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37483
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mother Superior wrote:
If you want the same rights.....
Then start acting the same way as US!!!!!!
What, like hillbilly Paris trash?? Sorry, unclear on your meaning. LOL.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Feb 13

Is A Reality

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37484
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mother Superior wrote:
If you want the same rights.....
Then start acting the same way as US!!!!!!
you want us all to act tedious and boring?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37486
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Not Yet Equal wrote:
No US law has ever required procreation ability or intent for marriage.
Several SCOTUS cases affirm procreation is not a requirement for the fundamental right of marriage to remain a fundamental right. Whether or not to procreate is a private decision, beyond the proper reach of the government, and independant of marriage:
Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974):“This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977)(plurality):“[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.”
Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977):“[I]t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.”
Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978):“[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”
Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987):“[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression[] of emotional support and public commitment.”
P
lanned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992):“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116 (1996):“Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
As you are well aware but deceitfully leave out, all these cases reference these decisions.

Please, post those in fairness, otherwise you disgrace your position.

Smile.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Feb 13

Is A Reality

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37487
Feb 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
As you are well aware but deceitfully leave out, all these cases reference these decisions.
Please, post those in fairness, otherwise you disgrace your position.
Smile.
Which part of "intimate and personal choice" are you unclear on? These matters are matters of choice; there is no requirement to breed. If there's no requirement to breed how can you possibly continue to claim that marriage rights are about progeny?

I've never bred, but someday soon your wife will leave you and marry me. Yes, we'll have to leave the state, but she wants to get out of Hooterville anyway.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 32,161 - 32,180 of46,977
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

106 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min Homer 1,033,280
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 5 min former res 64,896
jualanjerseybola 7 min ZakaMede1 1
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 7 min edogxxx 95,964
Abby 4-16 15 min Mister Tonka 23
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 37 min Jacques from Ottawa 167,363
Amy 4-16 51 min squishymama 8
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••