Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on ...

Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

There are 9653 comments on the The Skanner story from Mar 1, 2012, titled Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches. In it, The Skanner reports that:

With Maryland poised to legalize gay marriage, some conservative opponents and religious leaders are counting on members of their congregations, especially in black churches, to upend the legislation at the polls this fall.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Skanner.

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#10172 Sep 16, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Some creative absurdities and insulting concepts, but no honest assessment of the facts, just the same old excuses over and over.
A major difference seems to be, I think P knows he is just arguing to be arguing and doesn't really have a case, while B seems to believe the irrational, unsupportable prejudice he promotes.
In general, I would agree with that assessment. However, I've still seen posts were he asserted Italians and other ethnicities were "races', so I still think he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#10173 Sep 16, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Section Two of the 14th Amendment explicitly cites different rights for males and females, just as it lists separate rights for citizens v noncitizens and adults v minors. The ERA wasn't ratified, there is no gender equality right in the US Constitution.
Ever heard of equal protection and due process?

Probably not.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#10175 Sep 16, 2013
577 T-Rex wrote:
<quoted text>
He did not say anything about bestiality or incest either. What is your point? Homosexuality is justified because Jesus did not say anything about it? Do you have a point?
Homosexuality is justified whether or not Jesus said anything about it. I believe I was born heterosexual, just as I believe that homosexuals were born that way. THAT is what justifies it.

I was addressing someone who invoked the bible to try to justify bigotry toward homosexuals.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#10176 Sep 16, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Section Two of the 14th Amendment explicitly cites different rights for males and females, just as it lists separate rights for citizens v noncitizens and adults v minors. The ERA wasn't ratified, there is no gender equality right in the US Constitution.
What happened? Did you sleep through civics 101?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#10177 Sep 17, 2013
Terra Firma wrote:
Once again, Brian fails to actually read the contents of his cited link. If he had perhaps he wouldn't have overlooked this" "...the "Cakes By Cupcakes" incident didn't actually happen..." Which means it was merely a hypothetical example.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious; where same sex marriage supporters threatening to sue the taxpayers of Texas because they define marriage as one man and one woman and don't want government entitlements for same sex dependent beneficiaries is real. Male/female couples don't sue gays who refuse to participate in their weddings but same sex couples do.

They aren't bad people, they just don't have good political goals.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#10178 Sep 17, 2013
imom wrote:
Read the WHOLE 14th amendment. The only place where the word male is used is in refering to voting rights every where else the word is person. Unless you want to make the arguement that women are not persons you best admit the 14th amendment covers women.
Right, the 14th Amendment says all people are equal before the law, not male and female are equal. It's perfectly constitutional to make 18 year old men register for selective service but not 18 year old women. There is no gender equality right in the US Constitution.

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#10179 Sep 17, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for pointing out the obvious; where same sex marriage supporters threatening to sue the taxpayers of Texas because they define marriage as one man and one woman and don't want government entitlements for same sex dependent beneficiaries is real. Male/female couples don't sue gays who refuse to participate in their weddings but same sex couples do.
They aren't bad people, they just don't have good political goals.
Did you forget your Alzheimer meds, Brian? Because you're responding here to a comment I made to you in another thread.

And regarding the lie you asserted above, it's the Texas National Guard, whose funding is almost exclusively provided by the federal government, that is being threatened with a lawsuit for not complying with a direct order from the Secretary of Defense to process applications from same sex couples (married outside of Texas) for FEDERAL (not state) benefits.

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#10180 Sep 17, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Right, the 14th Amendment says all people are equal before the law, not male and female are equal. It's perfectly constitutional to make 18 year old men register for selective service but not 18 year old women. There is no gender equality right in the US Constitution.
You're simply pointing out a constitutionally valid exception allowed by the application of intermediate judicial scrutiny to the quasi-suspect class of "sex". It's still violates the the equal protection clause of the constitution to discriminate based on sex in the absence of an asserted interest that meets the criteria for intermediate judicial review.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10181 Sep 17, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>.Male/female couples don't sue gays who refuse to participate in their weddings but same sex couples do.
........
Can you provide a link to any story about a gay flower/wedding business owner that refused straight couple service?

Thanks.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10182 Sep 17, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Right, the 14th Amendment says all people are equal before the law, not male and female are equal.....
Prove that marriage law is excluded from that equal protection.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#10183 Sep 17, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove that marriage law is excluded from that equal protection.
Still trying to figure out how "all persons are equal" could mean women are not equal under the law....

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#10184 Sep 18, 2013
LAMBDA is suing the Texas National Guard to provide benefits for same sex marriage; that's against Texas' Constitution. Same sex marriage is unconstitutional in Texas.

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#10185 Sep 18, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
LAMBDA is suing the Texas National Guard to provide benefits for same sex marriage; that's against Texas' Constitution. Same sex marriage is unconstitutional in Texas.
The benefits in question are federal benefits and the federal government recognizes the same sex marriage. The Texas National Guard is refusing to perform an administrative task for the federal government for federal benefits, which has nothing to do with state benefits or the state constitution. Given the federal government provides substantially all funding for the national guard and the Secretary of Defense has ordered the national guard to comply with federal policy regarding federal same sex marriage benefits, the Texas National Guard is effectively disobeying a direct order from the civilian chain of command.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#10187 Sep 19, 2013
Marriage is defined as male/female in Texas' Constitution. Providing same sex marriage in Texas violates law. The Supreme Court determined marriage is defined by the state, not the federal government.

They sue because they have bad motives, not because they are bad people. They want political power more than peaceful coexistence with their neighbors. Keeping marriage male/female is like respecting your neighbor's privacy. You never hear of opposite sex couples suing homosexauls.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10188 Sep 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Marriage is defined as male/female in Texas' Constitution..
As he posts on a thread about legal same sex marriage in MD ...

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10189 Sep 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
...
They sue because they have bad motives, not because they are bad people. They want political power more than peaceful coexistence with their neighbors. Keeping marriage male/female is like respecting your neighbor's privacy. You never hear of opposite sex couples suing homosexauls.
So, now you argue that people only marry for "political power", and that there are many cases where gay business owners have turned away wedding business from heterosxuals.

Prove it.

I want a list of at least three verified cases where ANY gay business owner turned away ANY straight couple for their wedding business.

If you can't provide that, you might as well drop this silly line of what you call "reasoning". You are just making a fool of yourself.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10190 Sep 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
LAMBDA is suing the Texas National Guard to provide benefits for same sex marriage; that's against Texas' Constitution. Same sex marriage is unconstitutional in Texas.
As well they should be sued. No state should be able to take in federal dollars for their national guard, and then deny their soldiers equal treatment under federal law.

If they want to flaunt federal law, they need to stop accepting ALL federal dollars and benefits for any National Guard in their state, and provide them exclusively from state coffers.

It's simple, really.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10191 Sep 19, 2013
To be honest, I hope these anti-family states keep right on fighting and stonewalling, especially when it comes to the military.

In all of the branches of the armed forces, can you imagine the lawsuits that will be filed when legally marriage gay people are transferred to these states, and their legal marriages dissolve at the gates of their base, each time they set fool outside into the community?

Their freedoms restricted and removed on every leave? Even their freedom to leave the base would be in danger, if they didn't want their marriage and the protections is brings to melt away on that simple trip into town.

Such lawsuits would likely lead to forcing all states to allow same sex marriage.

As they should.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#10192 Sep 19, 2013
Quest wrote:
As he posts on a thread about legal same sex marriage in MD ...
The suit is from LAMBDA against Texas. Same sex marriage violates their Constitution, have some respect.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#10193 Sep 19, 2013
Quest wrote:
To be honest, I hope these anti-family states keep right on fighting and stonewalling, especially when it comes to the military.
In all of the branches of the armed forces, can you imagine the lawsuits that will be filed when legally marriage gay people are transferred to these states, and their legal marriages dissolve at the gates of their base, each time they set fool outside into the community?
Their freedoms restricted and removed on every leave? Even their freedom to leave the base would be in danger, if they didn't want their marriage and the protections is brings to melt away on that simple trip into town.
Such lawsuits would likely lead to forcing all states to allow same sex marriage.
As they should.
^^^What fantasy, the left doesn't allow our military to arm themselves in their workplace.

Lawsuits will likely lead to the public seeing how hateful you really are and enacting legislation to stop same sex marriage laws from activist courts.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Governors vow to fight SCOTUS ruling on gay mar... 10 min Synque 746
News Lawmakers Consider Gay Discrimination Policies 10 min lides 5,849
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 13 min KEVIN041994 34,042
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 15 min piratefighting 5,324
News Conservative Republicans question what's next a... 21 min Synque 181
News Religious liberty is rallying cry after gay mar... 42 min lides 173
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? 45 min lides 92
More from around the web