Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

[Quest]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
.
Be specific, what don't you understand (smile);
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Prove it, then we'll talk.

[Quest]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Saying something is meaningless without detailing why is an opinion.
The truth is, you have no logical response to the simple unadulterated truth. That is why it bothers you so much...
.

No truth in it. Here's the simple truth:

Marriage is different in every culture.
Mating behavior is different in every culture.
Mating behavior happens outside of marriage as much as inside it.
Marriage law does not enforce certain mating behavior within marriage - such things are decided by the individuals who participate.
Evolution happens without marriage.
Procreation happens without marriage.
Marriage happens without procreation.
Same sex couples who marry can and do procreate.

[KiMare]

KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Be specific, what don't you understand (smile);
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Quest wrote:

<quoted text>
Prove it, then we'll talk.

Giving up already???

SMile.

[KiMare]

Quest wrote:

<quoted text>
No truth in it. Here's the simple truth:
Marriage is different in every culture.
Mating behavior is different in every culture.
Mating behavior happens outside of marriage as much as inside it.
Marriage law does not enforce certain mating behavior within marriage - such things are decided by the individuals who participate.
Evolution happens without marriage.
Procreation happens without marriage.
Marriage happens without procreation.
Same sex couples who marry can and do procreate.

Now you are losing it...

Snicker.

[Not Yet Equal]

Each individual is free to conceptualize marriage for themselves, any way they choose.

But legally, marriage is a fundamental right of the individual.

The only eligibility requirement for fundamental rights is being human.

Reasonable restrictions may be made only when a compelling and legitimate governmental interest can withstand judicial scrutiny. Most can agree with the courts that reasonable restrictions include age, ability to demonstrate informed consent, and not being closely related or currently married. Within those limits, gay people qualify.

While churches may place any restrictions they choose on their own ceremonies, the government can only restrict fundamental rights when a compelling and legitimate justification can be demonstrated.

Procreation ability has never been a requirement for marriage, and therefore fails as a legitimate qualification. Yet even that irrational excuse for discrimination ignores the fact that gay people can and do reproduce, and are raising children either biologically related or adopted. Denial of equal treatment under the law provides nothing to opposite sex couple families. It only harms same sex couple families needlessly.

Gay couples are seeking equally under the laws in effect, in the remaining states that do not yet recognize their marriages, and by the federal government.

Neither tradition nor gender provides a legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of this fundamental right.

As Justice Kennedy wrote about the founding fathers: "They knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress."

Laws that treat gay people less than equal to straight people are laws that only serve to oppress. It is time to overcome the prejudices we were taught as children and stop harming our neighbors and family members by passing laws that dehumanize and harm gay citizens through denial of the legal equality promised in the founding documents and required by the 5th and 14th amendments to the constitution..

[Some Never Came Home]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
Now you are losing it...
Snicker.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, In Valentine vote,Illinois Senate "APPROVES" Gay marriage! So you see Mr./Mrs./Ms. Mangina equality marches on! And there is simply nothing you can do to stop it! It's the right thing to do and the Constitutional thing to do! Your existence is "Moot"! Move along now little "IT"!

[squish]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Be specific, what don't you understand (smile);
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Giving up already???

SMile.

The sentence you keep parroting makes no sense. Constraint on evolutionary mating behavior? Marriage constrains nothing, married people can and do mate with others.

Care to cite some UNBIASED studies that say gay marriages are bad environments in which to raise children?

[just facts]

Saluki Rod wrote:

I wonder how long it'll take the Neo-Nazi Far Right Christians to mobilize against this? It's just letting gays be married, what's the big freaking deal? I'm straight, and see no harm to society.

one nation under God that is America. Many folks put God first a and for those that do not that is their choice. However there are consequences to choices we make.
We Christians do tolerate all other choices however we are standing against being forced to approve, promote and otherwise advocate the choices they choose.----We are hated for our stand but that is okay. Stand with God's word we will till Jesus comes.

[squish]

just facts wrote:

<quoted text>one nation under God that is America. Many folks put God first a and for those that do not that is their choice. However there are consequences to choices we make.
We Christians do tolerate all other choices however we are standing against being forced to approve, promote and otherwise advocate the choices they choose.----We are hated for our stand but that is okay. Stand with God's word we will till Jesus comes.

I see your "One Nation Under God" and raise you "separation of church and state"

[KiMare]

Not Yet Equal wrote:

Each individual is free to conceptualize marriage for themselves, any way they choose.
But legally, marriage is a fundamental right of the individual.
The only eligibility requirement for fundamental rights is being human.

I don't think your really thought about that assertion...

Most importantly, it makes the word marriage meaningless.

Second, it is not even legally true.

Third, you set your own prejudicial parameters without legitimate cause.

[KiMare]

Not Yet Equal wrote:

Each individual is free to conceptualize marriage for themselves, any way they choose.
But legally, marriage is a fundamental right of the individual.
The only eligibility requirement for fundamental rights is being human.
Reasonable restrictions may be made only when a compelling and legitimate governmental interest can withstand judicial scrutiny. Most can agree with the courts that reasonable restrictions include age, ability to demonstrate informed consent, and not being closely related or currently married. Within those limits, gay people qualify.
While churches may place any restrictions they choose on their own ceremonies, the government can only restrict fundamental rights when a compelling and legitimate justification can be demonstrated.
Procreation ability has never been a requirement for marriage, and therefore fails as a legitimate qualification. Yet even that irrational excuse for discrimination ignores the fact that gay people can and do reproduce, and are raising children either biologically related or adopted. Denial of equal treatment under the law provides nothing to opposite sex couple families. It only harms same sex couple families needlessly.
Gay couples are seeking equally under the laws in effect, in the remaining states that do not yet recognize their marriages, and by the federal government.
Neither tradition nor gender provides a legitimate governmental interest sufficient for denial of this fundamental right.
As Justice Kennedy wrote about the founding fathers: "They knew times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress."
Laws that treat gay people less than equal to straight people are laws that only serve to oppress. It is time to overcome the prejudices we were taught as children and stop harming our neighbors and family members by passing laws that dehumanize and harm gay citizens through denial of the legal equality promised in the founding documents and required by the 5th and 14th amendments to the constitution..

As to the rest of your post;

SCOTUS has disagreed numerous times, not on a moral basis ever.

The differences between marriage with/without kids and gay couples;
A apple tree bearing fruit.
A apple tree not bearing fruit for some reason.
A walnut tree who never bears any fruit wanting to be a apple tree.
A walnut tree hanging apples on it's branches pretending to be a apple tree.

The claim that if the government doesn't 'require' apple trees to bear fruit, then it is discrimination not to call walnut trees apple trees too is simply silly.

Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Gay couples do not just fail in the primary essence of marriage, out of all relationships, they are the oxymoron of marriage.

Moreover, if you remove the element of procreation, you dumb down marriage to just a friendship. Hardly a cause for government interest, let alone selective discrimination.

Smile.

[KiMare]

Some Never Came Home wrote:

<quoted text>
Meanwhile back at the ranch, In Valentine vote,Illinois Senate "APPROVES" Gay marriage! So you see Mr./Mrs./Ms. Mangina equality marches on! And there is simply nothing you can do to stop it! It's the right thing to do and the Constitutional thing to do! Your existence is "Moot"! Move along now little "IT"!

However, the state of IL is about to collapse on the stupidity and corruption of it's politicians...

Short march I'd guess...

Snicker.

[KiMare]

squish wrote:

<quoted text>
The sentence you keep parroting makes no sense. Constraint on evolutionary mating behavior? Marriage constrains nothing, married people can and do mate with others.
Care to cite some UNBIASED studies that say gay marriages are bad environments in which to raise children?

Did someone squish your brain?

In other words, some married people break their vows and commit adultery? Isn't that a violation of the constraint of marriage?

I did site an unbiased study. The Regnerus study is the latest, largest, and most scientific study to date on seven family types.

It was professionally exonerated by peers of every single charge.

Lesbian couples rank last, behind single parents. Simply the fact jack.

Smile.

[KiMare]

squish wrote:

<quoted text>
I see your "One Nation Under God" and raise you "separation of church and state"

And I trump it with free speech.

Smirk.

[squish]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>Did someone squish your brain?

In other words, some married people break their vows and commit adultery? Isn't that a violation of the constraint of marriage?

I did site an unbiased study. The Regnerus study is the latest, largest, and most scientific study to date on seven family types.

It was professionally exonerated by peers of every single charge.

Lesbian couples rank last, behind single parents. Simply the fact jack.

Smile.

Your citation is not the latest, and as for the rest: http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/10/30/1110...

Ever heard of open marriage? Not every marriage is about monogamy, and that's not illegal.

[squish]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>And I trump it with free speech.

Smirk.

What does free speech have to do with marriage?

[Just Think]

just facts wrote:

<quoted text>
one nation under God that is America. Many folks put God first a and for those that do not that is their choice. However there are consequences to choices we make.
We Christians do tolerate all other choices however we are standing against being forced to approve, promote and otherwise advocate the choices they choose.----We are hated for our stand but that is okay. Stand with God's word we will till Jesus comes.

Why would you be opposed to gay and lesbian couples entering into legal, committed relationships?

[googly bear]

JUST GOOGLE: gay pride parade

Just Think wrote:

<quoted text>
Why would you be opposed to gay and lesbian couples entering into legal, committed relationships?

[Quest]

googly bear wrote:

JUST GOOGLE: gay pride parade
<quoted text>

What does any parade have to do with the millions of gay people who did not attend it?

Do we also prevent straight people form legally marrying because of "girls gone wild" videos, spring break footage, and Mardi gras celebrations?

[Quest]

KiMare wrote:

<quoted text>
And I trump it with free speech.
Smirk.

You can say what you wish, as always.

But when you support the creation of laws that are designed only to discriminate against people you don't like, where there is no rational state interest interest in that discrimination, expect a fight.

And history has shown it is a fight you will lose.

Nothing to smirk about, there.