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
4,441 - 4,460 of 17,568 Comments Last updated May 2, 2014
Broseph

New Castle, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4655
Jun 12, 2013
 
Abdurratln wrote:
This fool can't hold Bayard Rustin's jockstrap. The black community if full of problems. More black men are in jail than in college. Most black neighborhoods are being destroyed by illegal drugs. Most black kids a born to single moms. Most black men end up getting killed by other black men due tongang violence. But what's really hurting the black community? Gay marriage! Ugh. Fools.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4656
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

barry wrote:
<quoted text>it's cute how you assume that moral living would "ignore the homeless, the hungry, and the battered,". and of course that really isn't great with you either.
all i asked was were does it stop? you and i both know that it won't stop at a legal recognition of ssm but it will have to include special protection from being called wrong and sin. it will include a complete shut down of any debate over the negative aspects of such a life style. it will not only be sanctioned by the gov but it will also be subsidized by us all. and it won't be long that religious people will be forced to condone it also.
say goodbye to freedom of religion and to freedom of speech.
Do you actively help feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and help people who can't help themselves like I have with my volenteering at hospitals and hospices? I doubt you have. If you did, you wouldn't be giving gay people a hard time. And how do you know this? These are just conspiracy theories. Do you actually know any gay people?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4657
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you explain this better? How do the “references” ensure that opposite-sex couples are properly protected? What happens if an opposite-sex couple doesn’t consummate?
In some states failure to consummate the marriage is grounds for annulment.
At last, something specific from you. Can you expand on that? How do civil unions provide a “lesser level of commitment”?
You would have to ask the man and woman that chose to enter one, instead of legally accepting other as husband and wife.
Do they only last a short time? Is a divorce eventually required? Is cheating allowed? Is there a punishment for being committed higher? I want to understand this.
Those are questions for state government officials in states that have enacted civil unions.
I assume nothing. I KNOW from my own life, and from the millions of people that drive this movement, that it would be of valueless to us. I seek the benefits of marriage for my partner, not for some uninvolved third party. I’m not seeking to marry simply to “be married”, with no concern of who the protections apply to.
You seek the benefits of marriage but the very foundation upon which it rests, the monogamous union of husband and wife, you reject. Hmmmmmmm.....odd. It seems what you seek is not marriage but your same sex personal intimate sexual relationship called marriage by the state.
I suggest that 99.9% of gay couples seek to marry the same-sex partner they choose as the love of their life.
I suggest they seek to have the state declare their same sex personal intimate relationship, marriage. What's puzzling is the apparent lack of interest among SSCs that can legally marry, but don't. More female SSCs marry than male......
I’d prefer it if gay people felt more comfortable pursuing the type of partner that suits them best, but if that means an opposite-sex person, for whatever reason, then I’d support them.
Very good, we're making progress.
How is this any different from “these are for us, those are for you”? What specific functional differences can you list between civil unions and marriages that necessitate the need for both? Which of the 1000+ rights of marriage are different or absent in civil unions, specifically?
Marriage, the legally recognized monogamous union of husband and wife works just fine, but some folks don't like that whole male female part. Sort of like vegetarians who like the word "burger", but not the ground beef composition part. So we call a veggie patty a "burger"....some even have "grill marks" on them.
BESIDES the labels “husband” and “wife”. The government doesn’t rescind your marriage benefits if you aren’t using these labels in some approved proportion. It only cares that you are protecting your sworn one-and-only, and not already married to a slew of others, getting more benefits than you should, in unmanageable distributions.
The state only cares that we are, legally, "husband and wife". After that its Italian Stallion and Adrian.:)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4658
Jun 12, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
This fool can't hold Bayard Rustin's jockstrap. The black community if full of problems. More black men are in jail than in college. Most black neighborhoods are being destroyed by illegal drugs. Most black kids a born to single moms. Most black men end up getting killed by other black men due tongang violence. But what's really hurting the black community? Gay marriage! Ugh. Fools.
Drop the "Fools" and I'm with you on every particular.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4659
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

barry wrote:
<quoted text>what's his cult?
he has stated his a member of the abrahamic cult. i believe the muslim sect of that cult.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4660
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is talking about breaking up a “set”.
Ahhhhhh...but you are. Marriage, husband and wife, two in a set, as specified by law.
Will my marriage force yours to break up?
Now that's silly, just as silly as asking, "Would Kody Brown's marriages to his four sister wives break up yours?".
MAYBE they do, but their marriage isn’t disbanded if they don’t.
Again, maybe, it depends on the state, and thhe husband or wife.
I was adopted, something gay couples do. If marriage served my parents, it'll serve my partner and I.
It also seved society, because it provided you with a married mother and father.
Because gay couples participate in 2-person marriage like ANY married couple.
They do if the gay couple is of the opposite sex.
And marriage has not been “fundamentally altered”. This is all akin to saying that a particular country club is “Whites only”, and justifying it by pointing to a sign on the door which SAYS SO. But, take the sign down, and the club will not change one iota. Every function that serves white patrons, will serve patrons of any racial minority.
You are asking gay couples to go to the OTHER country club over THERE, well separated from yours, which does EVERYTHING your club does.
Please tell me you passed high school biology. Let's keep this simple. Marriage, in American law, is a union of one man and one woman, of age, able to consent, not close blood relatives, and not currently married. Now if you remove the husband, and replace him with another man, or the wife, and replace her with another woman, you have fundamental altered marriage, changed the composition of the relationship, and the foundation upon which it rests. Marriage, as it has been understood legally, historically, culturally, socially, and/of religiously, is a union of husband and wife.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4661
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahhhhhh...but you are. Marriage, husband and wife, two in a set, as specified by law.
<quoted text>
Now that's silly, just as silly as asking, "Would Kody Brown's marriages to his four sister wives break up yours?".
<quoted text>
Again, maybe, it depends on the state, and thhe husband or wife.
<quoted text>
It also seved society, because it provided you with a married mother and father.
<quoted text>
They do if the gay couple is of the opposite sex.
<quoted text>
Please tell me you passed high school biology. Let's keep this simple. Marriage, in American law, is a union of one man and one woman, of age, able to consent, not close blood relatives, and not currently married. Now if you remove the husband, and replace him with another man, or the wife, and replace her with another woman, you have fundamental altered marriage, changed the composition of the relationship, and the foundation upon which it rests. Marriage, as it has been understood legally, historically, culturally, socially, and/of religiously, is a union of husband and wife.
the law also specifies marriage as ss couples now...

you keep forgetting which century you are in, Petey.

SS couples adopting kids also benefits society, for the same reason.(since SS couples are as good of parents as mixed sex couples...)
barry

Rainsville, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4662
Jun 12, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you actively help feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and help people who can't help themselves like I have with my volenteering at hospitals and hospices? I doubt you have. If you did, you wouldn't be giving gay people a hard time. And how do you know this? These are just conspiracy theories. Do you actually know any gay people?
then you show your ignorance and doubt wrong.
i've volunteered at the rescue mission for over ten years and even given temporary work to those who needed a jump start back into the work force. i've provided transportation in helping them apply for jobs. i regularly visit the sick in hospitals and the shut in at home. our family is very musical and we sing to them sometimes weeks or days before they die.
we get calls all the time about people who have been arrested and then have to make arrangements for their families to visit and for lawyers.
i work for a highly respected university and am directly involved in arranging scholarships for students that we would like to see attend our school. homosexual people are usually very adept academically.
as to your last question, the two best employees i ever had were a lesbian couple. i trusted them completely. they had keys to the building. my wife even helped cover for one of them whenever she couldn't do a contract job that she did part time.
so i doubt that you can make a case for my giving gay people a "hard time"
in fact none that i have worked with ever gave me a hard time. and they knew exactly how i felt.
but i do personally know a pastor in california that ten years ago went through an assault on his worship services by gay protesters.
it wasn't pretty.
barry

Rainsville, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4663
Jun 12, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>he has stated his a member of the abrahamic cult. i believe the muslim sect of that cult.
interesting, an abrahamic cult of muslims. i'm not sure how that works. would that be like having a John the Baptist cult of mormons?
thanks, i'll have to see what this all means.
barry

Rainsville, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4664
Jun 12, 2013
 
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you actively help feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and help people who can't help themselves like I have with my volenteering at hospitals and hospices? I doubt you have. If you did, you wouldn't be giving gay people a hard time. And how do you know this? These are just conspiracy theories. Do you actually know any gay people?
oh, and feed the hungry. we have taken in homeless people under our own roof. shelter them and feed them. sometime we get burned but the rewards are far greater when we don't.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4665
Jun 12, 2013
 
barry wrote:
<quoted text>interesting, an abrahamic cult of muslims. i'm not sure how that works. would that be like having a John the Baptist cult of mormons?
thanks, i'll have to see what this all means.
yes, you should research things before you post about them.

you usually do not and end up looking like an ass.

muslims are part of the abrahamic cult. they worship the same proven mythical god as the christians and the jews, the god of abraham.

should we start discussing tutorial fees now?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4666
Jun 12, 2013
 
barry wrote:
<quoted text>interesting, an abrahamic cult of muslims. i'm not sure how that works. would that be like having a John the Baptist cult of mormons?
thanks, i'll have to see what this all means.
How strange that you would no so little about world spirituality. You don't even know that Christianity, Islam, and Hebrew are all Abrahamic religions? At least it confirms what we already knew: Your knowledge of the world you live in is exceptionally limited. And you have no desire to correct your knowledge deficit.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4667
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
How strange that you would no so little about world spirituality. You don't even know that Christianity, Islam, and Hebrew are all Abrahamic religions? At least it confirms what we already knew: Your knowledge of the world you live in is exceptionally limited. And you have no desire to correct your knowledge deficit.
most religious cult members know very little about their own cult. knowledge is the death knell of cults.

look at the first lesson of the christian cult from the garden of eden; "do not seek knowledge. do exactly as you are told and all will be perfect." doesn't get much more cult-like than that, unless you ask your members to indoctrinate their kids and friends and family and to give you their money...oh wait...they do that too.

the leaders of this cult didn't even want their bible read by the people...

cult people are funny.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4668
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

barry wrote:
<quoted text>then you show your ignorance and doubt wrong.
i've volunteered at the rescue mission for over ten years and even given temporary work to those who needed a jump start back into the work force. i've provided transportation in helping them apply for jobs. i regularly visit the sick in hospitals and the shut in at home. our family is very musical and we sing to them sometimes weeks or days before they die.
we get calls all the time about people who have been arrested and then have to make arrangements for their families to visit and for lawyers.
i work for a highly respected university and am directly involved in arranging scholarships for students that we would like to see attend our school. homosexual people are usually very adept academically.
as to your last question, the two best employees i ever had were a lesbian couple. i trusted them completely. they had keys to the building. my wife even helped cover for one of them whenever she couldn't do a contract job that she did part time.
so i doubt that you can make a case for my giving gay people a "hard time"
in fact none that i have worked with ever gave me a hard time. and they knew exactly how i felt.
but i do personally know a pastor in california that ten years ago went through an assault on his worship
services by gay protesters.

it wasn't pretty.
If you have had all of these positive experiences with gay people, then why make up inane theories that make them out to be some kind of thought police? Why deny them marriage, if they want it? Why support a pastor who badmouths them, even though you supposedly know better?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4669
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the law also specifies marriage as ss couples now...
you keep forgetting which century you are in, Petey.
Of course silly me, and veggie patties are now "burgers".....oh look they even have grill marks on them.....awwwwww....now the vegetarians won't be upset. "Look we have burgers just like the carnivores".
SS couples adopting kids also benefits society, for the same reason.(since SS couples are as good of parents as mixed sex couples...)
Actually Woody, any responsible adult adopting a child benefits society, even adult siblings. There ya go, making a case, at least for same sex siblings, to marry. I guess u do believe in marriage equality.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4670
Jun 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
If you have had all of these positive experiences with gay people, then why make up inane theories that make them out to be some kind of thought police? Why deny them marriage, if they want it? Why support a pastor who badmouths them, even though you supposedly know better?
Gay people can marry at least religiously without government license. Legally they can still marry, and have thevmarriage valid nationwide, if they enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife.

Oh wait.... That's not what u want.....u want the government to designate a same sex personal intimate sexual relationship as marriage.....ahhhhhh....therei n lies the challenge.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4671
Jun 12, 2013
 
Pietro Armando wrote:
In some states failure to consummate the marriage is grounds for annulment.
Only if one of the spouses complains about it. NO state just "steps in" and forcibly annuls a marriage, if the people INVOLVED don't care about consummation.
Pietro Armando wrote:
You would have to ask the man and woman that chose to enter one, instead of legally accepting other as husband and wife.
I'm asking YOU, because you made the suggestion. Why are you so short on specifics? How would a civil union provide "lesser" commitment? You said it, so you must understand it.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Those are questions for state government officials in states that have enacted civil unions.
No, they're questions for YOU, because you brought it up. If you can't clearly specify how or why civil unions represent a "lesser commitment", then my conclusion has to be that it isn't true.
Pietro Armando wrote:
You seek the benefits of marriage but the very foundation upon which it rests, the monogamous union of husband and wife, you reject. Hmmmmmmm.....odd. It seems what you seek is not marriage but your same sex personal intimate sexual relationship called marriage by the state.
No, we seek marriage, because marriage is a joining. 13 states and 15 other nations are able to be more inclusive. If you’re sure it can’t work, why is it working?
Pietro Armando wrote:
I suggest they seek to have the state declare their same sex personal intimate relationship, marriage.
They seek the legal bond that protects the one they love, and the state already calls that marriage.
Pietro Armando wrote:
What's puzzling is the apparent lack of interest among SSCs that can legally marry, but don't. More female SSCs marry than male......
Good for them. So?
Pietro Armando wrote:
Very good, we're making progress.
No, we're not.“Progress” will happen when you understand that this doesn’t really represent ANY gay people. Those gay people are in those situations because they couldn’t marry someone better suited for them in the first place (nor felt comfortable even pursuing such a person, very likely). I applaud them for not wanting to destroy their families, but you’re kidding yourself if that’s what people with same-sex orientation seek.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Marriage, the legally recognized monogamous union of husband and wife works just fine, but some folks don't like that whole male female part. Sort of like vegetarians who like the word "burger", but not the ground beef composition part. So we call a veggie patty a "burger"....some even have "grill marks" on them.
After asking you (again) for SPECIFICS, you completely dodge. These are softball questions I’m giving you. You can’t name ONE right or function that reflects a difference between civil unions and marriage?

And, you don’t really think that vegetarians came up with veggie patties because they “liked” the word “burger”, do you?

Pietro Armando wrote:
The state only cares that we are, legally, "husband and wife". After that its Italian Stallion and Adrian.:)
My state doesn’t care about that, Stallion.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4672
Jun 12, 2013
 
Pietro Armando wrote:
Ahhhhhh...but you are. Marriage, husband and wife, two in a set, as specified by law.
This doesn’t “break up” anything. Your marriage will remain intact. Anyone who wants to marry, still may. It only means that I may form a “set” also, with someone that I am best suited for.

And, you’re about to contradict yourself.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Now that's silly, just as silly as asking, "Would Kody Brown's marriages to his four sister wives break up yours?" .
Yes, it IS silly! Just as silly as you saying that MY marriage would “break up a set”. You obviously recognize that it WOULDN’T, even though you JUST SAID it would.

You are simply obfuscating, by bringing polygamy into it. Their marriage will not break up a set, and my marriage will not, and your marriage is not the “example set” that everyone must emulate.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Again, maybe, it depends on the state, and thhe husband or wife.
No, it only depends on the married couple. As I said, if they don’t care, the state doesn’t care.
Pietro Armando wrote:
It also seved society, because it provided you with a married mother and father.
HOW does it “serve society” for me to have had a married mother and father? Would society have been harmed if I were raised by a single parent, or by divorced parents, or by remarried parents? Do you oppose gay couples raising children? In what SPECIFIC ways is society better served by adopted children raised by married parents, than by adopted children raised by a couple in a civil union, or by ANY children not raised by a married opposite-sex couple?
Pietro Armando wrote:
They do if the gay couple is of the opposite sex.
I’ll remind you I live in Washington State. Married same-sex couples are a reality in many places in the world. You can’t continue to insist that it isn’t possible, while it IS all across the globe.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Please tell me you passed high school biology. Let's keep this simple. Marriage, in American law, is a union of one man and one woman, of age, able to consent, not close blood relatives, and not currently married.
Please tell me what any of that has to do with high school biology. Why did you even ASK that, only to go into American LAW?
Pietro Armando wrote:
Now if you remove the husband, and replace him with another man, or the wife, and replace her with another woman, you have fundamental altered marriage, changed the composition of the relationship, and the foundation upon which it rests.
No, we are only changing the restriction of who may participate. Marriage remains unchanged. Just like the country club, which will still be able to provide every last service it ever did, while no longer closing its doors to worthy people.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Marriage, as it has been understood legally, historically, culturally, socially, and/of religiously, is a union of husband and wife.
And gay people have been understood legally, historically, culturally, socially and religiously as immoral, evil, insane, and damaged. Unfit to adopt children. Unfit to serve our country. Targets for being fired, evicted, or attacked without cause. Understandings change over time, as new knowledge is gained.

There is no good reason to keep full marriage recognition from gay couples. Nothing will be taken from straight couples. The functions and processes of marriages will not change for anyone. And if civil unions offer every identical right, function and protection that marriage does, then there’s no real need for both, other than simple segregation. The places in the world that recognize our marriages have proven that.
DOLPHIN

Lancing, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4673
Jun 13, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

church leaders esp black church leaders who rob the blk community and pimp them of their hard endings are even worse than gays

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4674
Jun 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

EdmondWA wrote:
And gay people have been understood legally, historically, culturally, socially and religiously as immoral, evil, insane, and damaged. Unfit to adopt children. Unfit to serve our country.
Funny, this is how I view Pietro Armando.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••