Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Jan 7, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: NBC Chicago

Leaders of several Chicago-area African American churches on Monday urged state lawmakers to vote against pending legislation that would allow same-sex marriage in Illinois.

Comments
2,281 - 2,300 of 17,568 Comments Last updated May 2, 2014

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2395
Feb 13, 2013
 
AzAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
There are always poly people at gay pride parades. They're generally very open minded. That's not as prevalent in pleural relationships which seem to tend toward misogyny, religious extremism and abuse, especially of the women and children. Not to mention hebophilia.
As long as their all consenting adults, is there an issue?
Personally I have no problem with poly or pleural relationships if they can avoid these vices, other than they're off topic.
No matter how many ways it's discussed the issue is how do we as a society define marriage. If one is going to argue that the legal definition of marriage be redefined for one group under the guise of "marriage equality", then one better be prepared to accept other groups claims as well.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2396
Feb 13, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text> no TV for this kiddo...i';m sure that will bring in the pawn stars and american idol crowd...
and seriously, can you really have a parade without that kind of element?
Woody
Would ya consider adding a photo of "Woody" from toy story as your icon?
sickofit

Faribault, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2397
Feb 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Greed and gltuony are mentioned both over 20 times in bible as being bad sins...WHY DOESNT CHURCHES BAN FAT AND RICH PEOPLE FROM CHURCH???

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2398
Feb 13, 2013
 
Rose_NoHo wrote:
Con dumbs claim they want small government, but who do you think runs prisons?
Many prisons are contracted to private corporate administrations; government doesn't have to run prisons.

.
Rose_NoHo wrote:
You are saying you want bigger government.
No, same sex marriage would create bigger government, a larger role for government to license gender segregated marriage, wasteful government spending on a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries and higher taxes to pay for the whole mess.

.
Rose_NoHo wrote:
America already has too many people in prison, especially young black males.
If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. If more violent criminals are in prison, fewer are on the streets. Demographics is a zero sum game.

.
Rose_NoHo wrote:
We should not imprison people for non-violent drug offenses (I think half of people in jail are there for those kinds of offenses), in fact, we should legalize drugs.
^^^Rose thinks people selling drugs to our children shouldn't be in prison; I believe prison is the perfect place for convicted drug dealers and drug abusers. Better prison than the street. This is where we differ.

.
Rose_NoHo wrote:
I want smaller government.
More, prisons, More cost effective policing and prosecution. Safer streets.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2399
Feb 13, 2013
 
Rose_NoHo wrote:
...We should not imprison people for non-violent drug offenses (I think half of people in jail are there for those kinds of offenses),...
Non-violent; like Bernie Madoff? Non-violent criminals are criminals too. Prison is the perfect place for convicted felons; I think Rose is wrong.
sickofit

Faribault, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2400
Feb 13, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Non-violent; like Bernie Madoff? Non-violent criminals are criminals too. Prison is the perfect place for convicted felons; I think Rose is wrong.
Drug laws are UnConstitutional. Big difference then Bernie STEALING BILLIONS FROM INNOSENT PEOPLE...

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2401
Feb 13, 2013
 
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Many prisons are contracted to private corporate administrations; government doesn't have to run prisons.
.
LOL. Who do you think arrests the people who are put in prisons?
Oh, yeah, when are those forced prison marriages you predicted going to start happening?
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>No, same sex marriage would create bigger government, a larger role for government to license gender segregated marriage, wasteful government spending on a new class of same sex dependent beneficiaries and higher taxes to pay for the whole mess.
You are so stupid! Government's role wouldn't be any bigger, just a few more marriage certificates would be filed. The government's would have the same role. And you homophobes always talk about taxes as if gay people don't pay them.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. If more violent criminals are in prison, fewer are on the streets. Demographics is a zero sum game.
LOL. So, when are members of pro sports teams going to be forced to marry each other? You claimed they would be.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>^^^Rose thinks people selling drugs to our children shouldn't be in prison;
Rose's Law:
Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
Brian_G wrote:
I believe prison is the perfect place for convicted drug dealers and drug abusers. Better prison than the street. This is where we differ.
You want big government. A government that decides what drugs we should take. One that makes pot, which has never killed anybody, illegal, and one of the more common suicide drugs, aspirin, legal with no restrictions at all.
I want smaller government.

.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>More, prisons, More cost effective policing and prosecution. Safer streets.
Get rid of drug laws. Safer streets.
You Xians love to live in a dream world.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2402
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as their all consenting adults, is there an issue?
The issue is not the choices that adults make. The issue is how society can or should support the rights of individuals once they have made that choice.

Nobody has ever explained how equality is assured in a polygamous marriage. Nobody has ever explained what happens when two of the members decide that they no longer wish to be married to each other, but they both want to remain married to the rest of the group. Nobody has ever explained how the financial benefits often associated with married partners will be distributed fairly to all members of the group. Nobody has ever explained how we will avoid rampant marriage fraud as there is no cost to marrying an additional partner.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2403
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The issue is not the choices that adults make. The issue is how society can or should support the rights of individuals once they have made that choice.
Nobody has ever explained how equality is assured in a polygamous marriage. Nobody has ever explained what happens when two of the members decide that they no longer wish to be married to each other, but they both want to remain married to the rest of the group. Nobody has ever explained how the financial benefits often associated with married partners will be distributed fairly to all members of the group. Nobody has ever explained how we will avoid rampant marriage fraud as there is no cost to marrying an additional partner.
Polygamy remains one of the best irrational fear techniques the anti-gay folks have, as long as you overlook the fact it is not equal but different.

You demonstrate a few of the many reasons 2 does not equal 3 or more. Yet I predict this will be ignored and they will continue to claim something very different is the same.

While treating same sex couples equally under the laws currently in effect does not change what marriage is for straight couples, poly arrangements require changing the laws that determine what marriage is for straight and gay couples alike. It is not equal, but something different.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2404
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The issue is not the choices that adults make. The issue is how society can or should support the rights of individuals once they have made that choice.
So you agree that the Brown family should receive some form of legal marital recognition? After all they have chosen to marry in the manner they did. Each marriage has borne fruit of that marriage, children. Should society support those children by recognizing the marriage of their mother and father?
Nobody has ever explained how equality is assured in a polygamous marriage. Nobody has ever explained what happens when two of the members decide that they no longer wish to be married to each other, but they both want to remain married to the rest of the group. Nobody has ever explained how the financial benefits often associated with married partners will be distributed fairly to all members of the group. Nobody has ever explained how we will avoid rampant marriage fraud as there is no cost to marrying an additional partner.
If we use the Brown family as an example, each marriage is just that. The wives are married to the husband not to each other. If one chooses to "divorce", she is divorced for her husband because that's who she was married to. Granted the issues, although complex, are not insurmountable. As to fraud, think about this, if the law views the three spiritual marriages as just that, what is to prevent the wives from seeking public assistance? Nothing. In the eyes of the law, they are single mothers. The state subsidizes single mothers all the time. Uncle Sam is a polygamist.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2405
Feb 14, 2013
 
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Woody
Would ya consider adding a photo of "Woody" from toy story as your icon?
honetly, i donb't know how to transfer photos...don't really care to learn..

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2406
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So you agree that the Brown family should receive some form of legal marital recognition? After all they have chosen to marry in the manner they did. Each marriage has borne fruit of that marriage, children. Should society support those children by recognizing the marriage of their mother and father?
<quoted text>
If we use the Brown family as an example, each marriage is just that. The wives are married to the husband not to each other. If one chooses to "divorce", she is divorced for her husband because that's who she was married to. Granted the issues, although complex, are not insurmountable. As to fraud, think about this, if the law views the three spiritual marriages as just that, what is to prevent the wives from seeking public assistance? Nothing. In the eyes of the law, they are single mothers. The state subsidizes single mothers all the time. Uncle Sam is a polygamist.
all you need to do is fundamentally change the marriage laws of the US so it an equal marriage like the others...

For SSM, all one has to do is remove the laws purposefully enacted to prevent it.
AzAdam

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2407
Feb 14, 2013
 
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as their all consenting adults, is there an issue?
<quoted text>
No matter how many ways it's discussed the issue is how do we as a society define marriage. If one is going to argue that the legal definition of marriage be redefined for one group under the guise of "marriage equality", then one better be prepared to accept other groups claims as well.
I think I said that

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2408
Feb 14, 2013
 
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So you agree that the Brown family should receive some form of legal marital recognition?
Perhaps. But I've been asking what is meant by legal recognition, and you continue to avoid answering. It's like asking "Should our children be fully educated." Does that mean government pays for preschool? College? Technical school? Post grad work? You can't ask broad questions that allow expansive and conflicting answers and expect a yes or no answer.
After all they have chosen to marry in the manner they did. Each marriage has borne fruit of that marriage, children. Should society support those children by recognizing the marriage of their mother and father?
As far as I know, the mother and father would both already be recognized. Clearly, the woman who gave birth is recognized as a parent. I assume she lists her husband as the father. So the child does have the protection of having two parents.

Are there other benefits and responsibilities associated with marriage that can enhance the well-being of offspring? Yes. But you haven't answered how those would be adopted in these cases.

<quoted text>
If we use the Brown family as an example, each marriage is just that. The wives are married to the husband not to each other. If one chooses to "divorce", she is divorced for her husband because that's who she was married to.
Does that sound equal to you? What happens if Mrs. Brown decides to take on additional husbands?
Granted the issues, although complex, are not insurmountable.
I tend to agree that the problems are not insurmountable. Yet nobody has ever proposed comprehensive solutions. So perhaps the problems are insurmountable. Or, more likely, different polygamous groups do not agree on those solutions.
As to fraud, think about this, if the law views the three spiritual marriages as just that, what is to prevent the wives from seeking public assistance? Nothing. In the eyes of the law, they are single mothers. The state subsidizes single mothers all the time. Uncle Sam is a polygamist.
Actually, the father's income is considered before a single mother qualifies for public assistance. He does bear responsibility.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2409
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy remains one of the best irrational fear techniques the anti-gay folks have, as long as you overlook the fact it is not equal but different.
The best argument in favor of polygamy is reading the Bible.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2410
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The best argument in favor of polygamy is reading the Bible.
And yet the religious argument against equality only promotes one of the 8 types of marriage found there. Hmmmm...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2411
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

If same sex marriage supporters win and gender segregation marriage is licensed, next they'll promote polygamy and incest marriage.

If you're on the left, let me ask you 'Where's the final line?' How far will you go, then no further?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2412
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
If same sex marriage supporters win and gender segregation marriage is licensed, next they'll promote polygamy and incest marriage.
If you're on the left, let me ask you 'Where's the final line?' How far will you go, then no further?
your invented scenario was proved wrong before you were told to parrot it. it hasn't happened in the US states that have had it for a while now nor in the countries that have had it for a long while now...

you should research and think before you post things you were told to parrot but you do not understand....

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2413
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Are you kidding? Sounding intelligent is not one of Brian's priorities.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2414
Feb 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

woodtick57 wrote:
your invented scenario was proved wrong before you were told to parrot it. it hasn't happened in the US states that have had it for a while now nor in the countries that have had it for a long while now...
Same sex marriage didn't exist in written law, before the 21st century. Same sex marriage hasn't existed "for a long while", a few more generations and we can say "for a long while". We're still watching, astounded.

.
woodtick57 wrote:
you should research and think before you post things you were told to parrot but you do not understand....
Note, I don't suspect my political opponents motivations; I know good and bad people exist on both sides of this argument. Please give me resources, who do you think "told" me to "parrot" arguments? Have you read my gender segregation arguments on other forums?

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 4 min KiMare 49,426
Refusal to sell wedding gowns to lesbian couple... 1 hr TomInElPaso 149
Church firing stirs up controversy over same-se... 1 hr Wondering 49
Today's News: Our Take - Melody Thomas Scott Di... (Apr '13) 3 hr dmw 45
Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) 4 hr the inside track 31,190
Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 6 hr KiMare 24,864
Totus Tuus...all yours (Mar '12) 6 hr ELIAS IBARRA 152
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Wedding People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••