In Santa Fe (Feb. 18)

In Santa Fe (Feb. 18)

There are 42 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from Feb 17, 2011, titled In Santa Fe (Feb. 18). In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

Anti-gay-marriage measures: The House Consumer & Public Affairs Committee essentially killed two proposed constitutional amendments that would define marriage, for legal purposes as being between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Las Cruces Sun-News.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Joe Mustich

New Milford, CT

#1 Feb 18, 2011
Onward to full marriage equality rights in the 21st century. And enough with the marriage and sex police.

Cheers, Joe Mustich, CT Justice of the Peace,
Red Studio Farm, Washington Green, CT USA
Just Saying

Albuquerque, NM

#2 Feb 18, 2011
Yes...we need to allow marriage between men and sheep and women and dogs. I mean why stop at men-men and women-women? The bestiality rights movement will just make demands after the gays win theirs. You will have people marrying goldfish and horses and all kinds of animals. And I'm sure someone has a pet rock they are in love with. Can't discriminate against them either.

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#4 Feb 18, 2011
An OUTSTANDING BILL: HB602, sponsored by Reps. Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, and Nate Gentry, R-Albuquerque, is the brainchild of Think New Mexico, a Santa Fe think tank.

After the horrendous Citizens United decision this bill is needed even more today.
From the Think New Mexico press release:

Think New Mexico’s anti-corruption legislation has been introduced as House Bill 604 by the bipartisan team of Representatives Brian Egolf (D-Santa Fe) and Nate Gentry (R-Albuquerque).

House Bill 604, which was endorsed by the Santa Fe New Mexican before it was even introduced, takes the “pay” out of “pay to play corruption” by barring political contributions from lobbyists and anyone bidding on or holding a major government contract.

The bill also increases transparency by requiring the disclosure of the sources of funds used for election-related political advocacy. The current lack of disclosure prevents the public from knowing who is funding the increasing deluge of anonymous attack ads.

We encourage you to join this effort by emailing your legislators and Governor Martinez and asking them to support House Bill 604.

More info at: www.thinknewmexico.org

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#5 Feb 18, 2011
Kudos to the Consumer & Public Affairs Committee for standing up the the bible thumpin' homophobes.

I wonder if they heard any of the absolutely stupid "Man on Dog Santorum' bestiality nonsense.
Jacob Schweitzer

Washington, NC

#7 Feb 18, 2011
I'm glad the anti-gay measures were tabled.

Seriously: with all the issues facing our state, whether or not the gay couple next door is married is not on my list of priorities, and I'm sick of it being a priority for all these other states.

We can't dictate behavior, folks, and these people will always be gay. In a free society, we may see things we don't like, but it's not right to make it against the law.

Jacob Schweitzer, Roswell
Jacob Schweitzer

Washington, NC

#8 Feb 18, 2011
To the guy posting as "just saying:" You're comparing gay people do dogs and sheep, do you realize that?

I gotta point something out: during the civil rights movement, African-Americans were compared to animals too.
Joe Mustich

New Milford, CT

#9 Feb 18, 2011
As a justice of the peace in CT, I officiate at the marriages of hundreds of couples who come here to wed from all across the country, many of whom have been together for 20, 30 and 45 years.

CT passed a civil union law in 2005, and a marriage equality law in 2008, and my spouse and I had both....

Cheers, Joe Mustich, CT Justice of the Peace,
Red Studio Farm, Washington Green, CT USA

So to the marriage police: Happy Valentine's Day..and just lighten up...
Joe Mustich

New Milford, CT

#10 Feb 18, 2011
PS: My spouse and I have been together for almost 32 years, and it feels just like yesterday when we met on the beach on Fire Island Pines, NY.

Cheers from the 21st century state of CT....

It's time NM.
velux

Albuquerque, NM

#11 Feb 18, 2011
the best velux web site
www.ferestremansarde.ro

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#12 Feb 18, 2011
I think churches have a right to decide their definition of marriage, and who they will and will not marry. I think it's a moral issue for them. As far as the state goes...they shouldn't try to legislate morality and their view or definition of it.

“Eat me. I'm a Danish.”

Since: Dec 10

Las Cruces, New Mexico

#13 Feb 18, 2011
CatCiao wrote:
I think churches have a right to decide their definition of marriage, and who they will and will not marry. I think it's a moral issue for them. As far as the state goes...they shouldn't try to legislate morality and their view or definition of it.
EXACTLY! Marriage belongs to God and no one else. And churches shoudl decide within their own groups teh requirements for "marriage".

But as far as taxes, laws, and our government is concerned they have no business meddling at all. Married people should be eligible for that as well as those "married" outside the church in a union of some sort.

Give marriage to God! It belongs to him! But give the legal right for a union to the PEOPLE. If a marriage is only between a man and a woman (and I believe it is) then that is for the people of GOD to decide. But for those who want same sex "unions" give it to them! We simply cant legislate morals nor deny two same sex people the right to file jointly.
CornDogz

Albuquerque, NM

#14 Feb 18, 2011
Sol Rebl wrote:
<quoted text>
EXACTLY! Marriage belongs to God and no one else. And churches shoudl decide within their own groups teh requirements for "marriage".
Ok, so then why do you gays need a state sponsored marriage license?

“Eat me. I'm a Danish.”

Since: Dec 10

Las Cruces, New Mexico

#15 Feb 18, 2011
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, so then why do you gays need a state sponsored marriage license?
You didnt really understand a thing I said did you?
sane sage

Duncan, NM

#17 Feb 18, 2011
CatCiao wrote:
I think churches have a right to decide their definition of marriage, and who they will and will not marry. I think it's a moral issue for them. As far as the state goes...they shouldn't try to legislate morality and their view or definition of it.
According to the Bill of Rights, Churches have absolutely no rights at all except to be left alone. They have the absolute right o decide who they will marry and/or recognized as married. They also have the absolute right to condemn anyone they want to to hell. And every sane and rational persons have the right to reject their bigoted and hateful messages.

Any 2 loving adults, regardless of sex, should damn well have the opportunity to be married and receive all the benefits heterosexual couples enjoy.
sane sage

Duncan, NM

#18 Feb 18, 2011
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, so then why do you gays need a state sponsored marriage license?
Thogh I am not gay, I am informed enough to anser such a ridicoulus question.

Any well informed and thinking person knows that without a state sponsored license which spell to the legal responsibilities and obligations heterosexual couples benefit from. And, unfortunately, even a state issued license does not convey those rights to the federal level.

No well informed person would ask such a ridiculous, unreasoned, and senseless question.
CornDogz

Albuquerque, NM

#19 Feb 18, 2011
Sol Rebl wrote:
<quoted text>
You didnt really understand a thing I said did you?
Sure did, you're simply avoiding a response and trying to misdirect, as usual.
CornDogz

Albuquerque, NM

#20 Feb 18, 2011
sane sage wrote:
<quoted text>
Thogh I am not gay, I am informed enough to anser such a ridicoulus question.
Any well informed and thinking person knows that without a state sponsored license which spell to the legal responsibilities and obligations heterosexual couples benefit from. And, unfortunately, even a state issued license does not convey those rights to the federal level.
No well informed person would ask such a ridiculous, unreasoned, and senseless question.
No well informed sane person would seek a license for such a ridiculous, unreasoned, and senseless purpose!

“Eat me. I'm a Danish.”

Since: Dec 10

Las Cruces, New Mexico

#21 Feb 18, 2011
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure did, you're simply avoiding a response and trying to misdirect, as usual.
Well, I dint see that it warranted a response. It was more of childish accusation than a question. It was an attempt to insinuate I was gay. Not a logical question.

I feel the state should issue a "union permit" or somethgin to that effect. Churches and religion can marry who they want and every one else can do what tehy want as well. Call it what you like. So I think anyone who wants that union should have it. And anyone who wants the holy sanctity of marriage should get that in their church.

Did that answer your question or are you still "unsatisfied"?

“Eat me. I'm a Danish.”

Since: Dec 10

Las Cruces, New Mexico

#22 Feb 18, 2011
The stte is not selling "salvation permits" and neither should it sell "marriage permits". Marriage is a holy union and filing jointly is the governments purview.

The state can not authorize a marriage and neither can the church authorize joint filing.

If 2 people live together and mee tthe basic requirements for a family unit they shoudl have all the benefits regardless of orientation. But they shoudl leave MARRIAGE out of it. That is betweena man, a woman, and GOD.

“Keep it real”

Since: Dec 09

Deming, NM

#23 Feb 18, 2011
My sentiments exactly, well said
Sol Rebl wrote:
The stte is not selling "salvation permits" and neither should it sell "marriage permits". Marriage is a holy union and filing jointly is the governments purview.
The state can not authorize a marriage and neither can the church authorize joint filing.
If 2 people live together and mee tthe basic requirements for a family unit they shoudl have all the benefits regardless of orientation. But they shoudl leave MARRIAGE out of it. That is betweena man, a woman, and GOD.

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.

Los Lunas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News New Mexico clinics close up, disappear with pat... Sun Eingles 8
News Child molester sentenced 33 years later (Dec '11) Apr '16 Hmmm 2
Paul Marez Apr '16 Hmmm 1
bfpd Apr '16 Enough 911 1
trafic in main st Apr '16 Enough 2
News Residents voice concern over new probation, par... Apr '16 jcperea 2
hovering sound in the night sky. Apr '16 xlizz 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Los Lunas Mortgages