Poll: Opposition to gay marriage wani...

Poll: Opposition to gay marriage waning in Ky.

There are 50 comments on the Times Herald story from Jul 29, 2014, titled Poll: Opposition to gay marriage waning in Ky.. In it, Times Herald reports that:

Sarah Peacock, of Louisville, Ky, puts a ring on Kristy Sturgill's, of Bardstown, Ky, finger alongside her daughter Lanie Peacock and Rev.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Times Herald.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#3 Jul 30, 2014
It's so nice to know that opposition to gay marriage is cordwaining in the Blue Grass State.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#5 Jul 30, 2014
Ditto for every state. As the old bigots die off, so does the majority of the opposition to marriage equality.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#6 Jul 30, 2014
So now only 50% of Kentuckians need a law to keep themselves from marrying a GAY person?
.
Perhaps they have found a cure for homophobia
Lez b honest

Bardstown, KY

#7 Jul 30, 2014
Is there a way that citizen vote to pass this law?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Jul 30, 2014
Lez b honest wrote:
Is there a way that citizen vote to pass this law?
Only if 60% of the KY legislature first votes to send a new constitutional amendment to the people for a vote.

That's EXACTLY why all those states rushed to add bans to their constitutions; they knew how hard it would be to overturn them in the future. As long as the GOPasaurs can control the state legislature in those southern states, they can prevent another popular vote from taking place.

Of course they never thought the federal courts would act so quickly to overturn those bans...
Ted Haggard s Gospel Rub

Philadelphia, PA

#16 Jul 30, 2014
Lez b honest wrote:
Is there a way that citizen vote to pass this law?
This story isn't about a law, christardate, this story is about waning interest in marriage equality bans.

If you are eager to vote in favor of or support marriage equality bans then I'd suggest you move to Iran, Uganda, Saudi Arabia or Russia. Then you should be all set for the foreseeable future. If you aren't killed by the locals for any number of religious or nationalistic reasons.

Hope that helps.
An observation

Bowling Green, KY

#17 Jul 30, 2014
Before there were any marriage laws on the books here in the U.S., marriage was between a man and a woman – there weren’t any “same sex marriages” then either. Why? Because people understood the concept of language - that only a man can be a husband, and only a woman can be a wife. Now you are a bigot, hateful, etc. if you acknowledge this simple fact. When laws were eventually put on the books, there was no mention of gender because the word marriage was enforced as the word was defined – defining it as being a man and a woman is redundant. It is totally absurd that constitutional amendments or laws ever had to be passed to define the meaning of a word that was already defined.

The same nonsensical way of thinking has led to the recent ruling by the Maine Supreme Court on a 5-1 vote that it is illegal to not allow men to enter women’s restrooms and vice versa if they claim they relate more to the gender of a particular restroom designated for them. California now forces boys sports teams to admit girls, and girls sports teams to admit boys if they feel like they are the opposite gender “trapped” in the wrong kind of body. So it is entirely possible that a boys team could have all females on the team and a girls team have males on the team under this policy. This is the type of logic we are dealing with from the left – they think this craziness makes perfect sense – and if anyone dare voice disagreement with it – they are branded as hateful bigots. These same people want to ban therapy for people who don’t want same-sex attractions, but want therapy and cosmetic surgery for people who don’t want to accept the gender they were born as – and want taxpayers to be forced to pay for it – liberal judges recently ruled that it is unconstitutional for taxpayers *not* to be forced to pay for such “treatment” for prison inmates. We aren’t dealing with people who’s elevators make it to the top. The liberals literally think this stuff makes sense, and those who disagree with this complete craziness are “backward”,“Neanderthals”, etc.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#18 Jul 31, 2014
An observation wrote:
that only a man can be a husband, and only a woman can be a wife.
That remains true today, a man is still a husband regardless of whether he is married to another man or a woman. What makes a man a "HUSBAND" is the fact that he is legally married to another person.

The same holds true for a woman. Regardless of whether she is married to a man or another woman, she is still a wife. Why? Because the term "WIFE" indicates that she is legally married to another person.

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#19 Jul 31, 2014
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
That remains true today, a man is still a husband regardless of whether he is married to another man or a woman. What makes a man a "HUSBAND" is the fact that he is legally married to another person.
The same holds true for a woman. Regardless of whether she is married to a man or another woman, she is still a wife. Why? Because the term "WIFE" indicates that she is legally married to another person.
Correct. And a spouse is a spouse is a spouse, irregardless.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#20 Jul 31, 2014
An observation wrote:
Before there were any marriage laws on the books here in the U.S., marriage was between a man and a woman – there weren’t any “same sex marriages” then either. Why? Because people understood the concept of language - that only a man can be a husband, and only a woman can be a wife. Now you are a bigot, hateful, etc. if you acknowledge this simple fact.......
So, you believe that everyone is better off if gay folks pretend to be straight and marry unsuspecting straight folks, denying BOTH a marriage based on mutual attraction and any sort of romantic or physical love? All because they cannot be attracted to the opposite gender?

I can't imagine you want that sort of life for yourself, or for your kids, would you? On either side of that equation.

If you believe that this should be the only choice for someone who happens to be gay, and you believe they should be denied legal marriage simply because of a harmless innate and natural trait, then yes, by definition, you are a bigot.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#21 Jul 31, 2014
An observation wrote:
....... When laws were eventually put on the books, there was no mention of gender because the word marriage was enforced as the word was defined – defining it as being a man and a woman is redundant. It is totally absurd that constitutional amendments or laws ever had to be passed to define the meaning of a word that was already defined.
..........
Language changes all the time - very few definitions are completely static. If one group creates a law that directly harms another group, for no valid or logical reason other than "We don't like them", then the disenfranchised group can seek redress in court.

That has happened throughout out country's history, and is still happening today.

Do you have a rational and logical reason for believing that gay folks should never legally marry? So far, every court has decided there isn't one. Do you have something new?
great place

Frankfort, KY

#22 Jul 31, 2014
Marry away gay friends and homies. It's time people grew up and got over the fact that humans can love humans regardless of gender.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#28 Jul 31, 2014
An observation wrote:
Before there were any marriage laws on the books here in the U.S., marriage was between a man and a woman – there weren’t any “same sex marriages” then either
I have good news for you; sugar
.
For thousands of years marriage was called 'Pairing of the Saints' and was for men only
http://www.iheartchaos.com/post/22806986381/t...
Disney

Pella, IA

#29 Jul 31, 2014
eastern ky still considers homosexuality as a sin !
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#30 Jul 31, 2014
Disney wrote:
eastern ky still considers homosexuality as a sin !
Thats weird
.
Its not on the sin list:
**********
1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me
.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
.
3. Thou shalt keep holy the sabbath day
.
4. Honor thy father and thy mother
.
5. Thou shalt not kill
.
6. Thou shalt not commit adultery
.
7. Thou shalt not steal
.
8. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor
.
9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife
.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods
**********
Fred

Bardstown, KY

#32 Jul 31, 2014
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Thats weird
.
Its not on the sin list:
**********
1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me
.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
.
3. Thou shalt keep holy the sabbath day
.
4. Honor thy father and thy mother
.
5. Thou shalt not kill
.
6. Thou shalt not commit adultery
.
7. Thou shalt not steal
.
8. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor
.
9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife
.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods
**********
There is no such thing as a "sin list". Christians are called to follow Jesus and live life in His way.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#35 Jul 31, 2014
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as a "sin list". Christians are called to follow Jesus and live life in His way.
You're confusing Christians with the evangelical fundamentalist criminals who tortured and murdered Jesus in cold blood and hung him on a cross
.
So Jesus doesn't hang out with you anymore; and I don't blame him
.
I wouldn't hang out with you either
.
Shame on you

Since: Oct 10

San Francisco

#36 Jul 31, 2014
Disney wrote:
eastern ky still considers homosexuality as a sin !
It also considers roadkill an entrée and moonshine a cocktail. And it actually takes pride in being home to the Creation Museum. So there's not much cause for concern, at least not on our part.
Latter Day Taints

Philadelphia, PA

#38 Jul 31, 2014
Disney wrote:
<quoted text> i pointed out eastern ky considers it a sin and you slandered me and gave me a lecture such anger .you need to chill bro
I can't slander a moniker, rube. And it would be defamation in this context.

No one cares if you think something is a "sin." We are discussing secular laws here, equal rights for lgbt people.

You astonishingly don't lavish your same focus on headlining Commandment "sins" of coveting or taking the lawd's name in vain or bearing false witness or disrespecting one's parents. Go and bar those unrepentant "sinners" from marriage, Cletus.

You merely use (selected) scripture as a justification for your sexual problems and your bigotry.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#40 Aug 1, 2014
WOW wrote:
You people are so freaking gay!
Thank you for the compliment.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

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.

Frankfort Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
matt bevin, end corruption! 15 min Stop Corruption 20
When will the Western Hills Football team actua... 17 min WH Supporter 25
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 17 min ChromiuMan 151,940
Two creeks 27 min Rds 1
Wendell Marrs a.k.a. Jacob Jones on Facebook 27 min wtf 22
Justin Hendershot 3 hr clol 8
Politicians/FPD cover up 3 hr Copyright 6

Frankfort Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Frankfort Mortgages