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 (Page 556)

Showing posts 11,101 - 11,120 of17,568
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12041
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
There is NO California law that says a man can be a lesbian. Jesus tap-dancing Christ.
A man born of the Greek isle of Lesbos emigrates to California. He is a lesbian.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12042
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
There is NO California law that says a man can be a lesbian. Jesus tap-dancing Christ.
A man born on the Greek isle of Lesbos emigrates to California. He is a lesbian, a male lesbian.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12043
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
A man born on the Greek isle of Lesbos emigrates to California. He is a lesbian, a male lesbian.
And there are only Men on Isle of Man. But that still doesn't prove anything.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12044
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
And there are only Men on Isle of Man. But that still doesn't prove anything.
(Chucking)..... Good come back!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12045
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
And there are only Men on Isle of Man. But that still doesn't prove anything.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_people...

People of the Isle of Man are Manx people. The words Manxman and Manxwoman are also used.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12046
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Terra Firma wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, the Virginia ban was originally enacted in 1691, over 150 years prior to the 1850-1870 time period in your citation regarding New York. New York was one of 7 states that never enacted anti-miscegenation laws.
Wait....waitaminit....did Little Terry do some homework? Why yes he did! Bravo Little Terry!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12047
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
My pronouncement is just that.......I'm a Lesbian attracted to women more specifically my wife......is that so hard for you to grasp?
Uhhhhhh.....no....I stated that. You professed a same sex attraction.
And being a Lesbian has NOTHING to do with being from the Greek Island of Lesbo!!!
Ahhhhhhh.....but folks from that Island are Lesbians.
You got confused by my question........interesting... ...so, you have little or no comprehension......okay, got it!!!
That's it what you have, but if it works for you......
If I have the FUNDAMENTAL right to marry someone of the opposite-sex......why do I NOT have that same FUNDAMENTAL right to marry the person of my choosing who happens to be the same sex as myself?
By that reasoning, why don't you have a FUNDAMENTAL right to marry__________a close relative, or more than one person)? Simplest saying "I don't want to", doesn't address the question.
When you claim that I have the right as ANY other woman does to marry a man, in essence you are asking me to live a lie instead of marrying the person who I CHOOSE to marry instead of just because they are opposite-sex than myself!!!
No one is asking you "to live a lie". You can marry whomever you want without state recognition. However the right to marry, still requires a legal definition of marriage! Why is that so hard to grasp! So if you can change the legal definition of marriage for your needs/desires/wants, so you don't "have to live a lie", why can't someone else.

Just out of curiosity, if a woman who once identified as a lesbian, or one that still does, CHOOSES chooses to marry a man, is she "living a lie"?

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12048
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
A man born of the Greek isle of Lesbos emigrates to California. He is a lesbian.
No, he's not.......he's just a man who loves women.......you will post anything just because you don't like what is happening.....that's sad!!!

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12049
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

barry wrote:
they decided to not file for tax exemption on the pavilion. all other property is still tax exempt. they have stopped performing weddings there. no more discrimination.
They did that after they refused to rent the property for a civil union ceremony and thus were still bound their tax abatement agreement with the state to offer public access to the facility on an equal basis at the time they violated their agreement. Withdrawing the facility from public use after their violation of the agreement doesn't excuse or exempt a violation that occurred while the agreement was still in effect.
barry wrote:
you might do some research before you make such strong claims.
And you should pay more attention to the context of why this was even mentioned in the thread. It was cited by Brian_G as an example of violating Christian religious freedom when in fact his assertion was one of his usual lies.

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12050
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks for finding this information. Same sex marriage supporter can't deal with truth; that's why they call us bigots.
On the contrary, Barry just asserted his opinion as fact like you do, Brian, and also like you lied as a result.

Here is a link to the results of the administrative investigation of the discrimination complaint. All the facts cited about the venue being operated as a public accommodation open to the general public on an equal basis in return for a property tax abatement are substantiated by this investigation. Your assertions are not substantiated and thus are lies.

http://www.nj.gov/oag/newsreleases08/pr200812...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12051
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Right, there's always just been a deep cultural, historical, legal, social and religious understanding of beating the crap out of any gay people who dare raise their heads.
Uhhhhhhhhh........what? "Gay" as in "homosexual" ain't that old. So who was "beaten the crap out of" before then? Besides this is what I said:

Pietro Armando wrote:
It the reason marriage is recognized, remember SSM is a recent invention, not even 10 years old. There's no deep cultural, historical, legal, social, and or religious understanding of marriage as a union of two people regardless of gender composition.
Good thing that's ending. Now we can expect to be included in all that cultural, historical, legal, social and religious understanding.
Oh of course it will...after all what percentage of legally married couples are same sex female, and same sex male? Who knows, if history is any guide, SSM might not last that long.
But we haven't changed a single word of the Constitution. Our parades and rainbows had no effect there. What we changed were laws that were ADDED to insist that this bond was necessary. We were successful in our attempts to change that, because those laws ran afoul of the Constitution.
The constitution is open to interpretation. One judge, can reach a decision 180 degrees from another's. "Rights" that the founding father's would have found alien, or did not address, can be read into the constitution. "Sexual orientation" is a case in point. Words such as "homosexual", or "heterosexual", didn't even exist in 1787, nor would exist until a hundred years later.
So, the parades were not what made this possible. What made it possible is the fact that laws like DOMA only temporarily hid the fact that the bond you describe was never a necessity to begin with.
Silly me, but same sex sexual bonds are so vital to societal stability, that all human societies, cross time and place, have acknowledged them, couldn't function without them.
Sure, and a state could decide to disregard humanity, and grant marriage to animals, or they could disregard life, and let people marry the dead or inanimate objects.
Let's see it happen first. Fearmongering does not an argument make.
Let's stick with living consenting adults. So why is conjugality, opposite sex expendable, but not monogamy, or cosanguinity? They can't be that vital or NECESSARY? Can they?
Ah, you mean back in the "good ole days" when we suppressed our identities and pretended to be heterosexual
What did the nice gay folks do before the invention of political sexual identity labels? After all, "homosexual" didn't appear until the late 1800s, "gay" to refer to "homosexual" a few decades after that. Maybe, just maybe, someone was looking for a way, other than Lucky Charms, to market the rainbow!
The "have always" argument also fails. Many people "have always" treated gays like lepers, locking us out of every conceivable social convention. Military units "have always" functioned without gays. Many clubs and organizations "have always" excluded gay people as a rule.
Please enlighten me. Same sex sexual behavior, SSSB, ain't new, yet, no cross time, cross place SSM? Why haven't human societies organized themselves around the "two person regardless of gender composition" marriage model?
The irony is, i.....
Irony? As in a "gay man" was a womanizer in decades past, to a "gay man" who isn't sexually attracted to women! That kind of irony?
What men and women "have always" done is not at issue. No one is trying to stop them. They will continue to be free to do what they have always done. But the "historic understanding" of marriage does not serve as a justification for continuing to exclude same-sex couples as well.
Why stop there? Same sex trios? Polygamy? Polyamory? Include every ADULT HUMAN combo, yes?

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12052
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
She chose not to participate in a same sex wedding ceremony, not to support or service it. Don't you believe individuals have the right to not attend (or attend) religious services as they choose?
Acting as a individual, yes. When operating a business as a public accommodation, no. A business isn't invited to attend a wedding ceremony; it's paid to provide goods and services to customers.
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage is the death of freedom.
Your advocacy of discrimination against and infringement of the fundamental rights of minority groups you dislike is the death of freedom. Freedom belongs to all citizens, not merely those who can garner majority support.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12053
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhhhhhh.....no....I stated that. You professed a same sex attraction.
<quoted text>
Ahhhhhhh.....but folks from that Island are Lesbians.
<quoted text>
That's it what you have, but if it works for you......
<quoted text>
By that reasoning, why don't you have a FUNDAMENTAL right to marry__________a close relative, or more than one person)? Simplest saying "I don't want to", doesn't address the question.
<quoted text>
No one is asking you "to live a lie". You can marry whomever you want without state recognition. However the right to marry, still requires a legal definition of marriage! Why is that so hard to grasp! So if you can change the legal definition of marriage for your needs/desires/wants, so you don't "have to live a lie", why can't someone else.
Just out of curiosity, if a woman who once identified as a lesbian, or one that still does, CHOOSES chooses to marry a man, is she "living a lie"?
Again.....I DIDN'T need to profess anything when we got our marriage license except that I was the person who I had stated I was.......no one asked me if I was a Lesbian or heterosexual:-)

You really might want to do the research about the Island........here ya go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbos

If marriage is about ESTABLISHING kinship......then why would I need or want to marry someone I'm already related to? As for marry more than one person.......that is a State requirement that needs to be challenged by those who are interested in that aspect of marriage......and you've been told that many times, also my question WASN'T changing the current 2 consenting adult requirement.....but again, instead of answering the question......you continue to want to make a jackazz outta yourself!!!

Again, why SHOULDN'T I have the right to marry the person of my choosing and also have that marriage legally recognize by both the State and Federal government? In fact....I did have that right, exercised that right and have been happily and legally married for over 5 years:-)

I have NEVER stated that polygamist or others DON'T have the right to challenge the definition of marriage or seek the right to marry more than one person.......but it is THEIR fight and I wish them Good luck in their fight.....it is however NOT my fight and the outcome DOESN'T affect my marriage in any way......just like my legal marriage DOESN'T affect your marriage!!!

Yes, if a woman is a Lesbian and she opts to marry a man.....in my opinion she is living a lie......now if she is BISEXUAL that's an entirely different situation!!!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12054
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
No, he's not.......he's just a man who loves women.......you will post anything just because you don't like what is happening.....that's sad!!!
Quite fascinating actually, you've inspire me to research. It's amazing what one finds, often accidentally. The use of the word "lesbian" to denote women who are sexually attracted to other women, is not that old. It's original meaning is to refer to the residents, men, women, and children, of the Greek isle of Lesbos.

http://voices.yahoo.com/the-origin-word-lesbi...
Huge swaths of our modern day vernacular come from the old Greek and Latin languages, shaped by the culture of the ancient empires. Aphrodisiacs, substances or rituals meant to increase sexual arousal and desire, are named for the Greek goddess Aphrodite. Nymphomania, a condition that was originally used to refer to sexually active women which has since been disproved, also draws from Greek mythology comparing women to nymphs, who were spirits that would tempt men, gods and satyrs into sex and sensuality. Even our modern day term for women who have a romantic and sexual preference for other women, lesbian, comes from this period of history.
A lesbian would originally have been someone who hailed from the isle of Lesbos. This is a relatively small island in the Aegean Sea off the coast of Turkey. The island itself wasn't particularly remarkable for anything amazing, but it did boast a poet by the name of Sappho around the year 600 BC. Female poets, and love poetry aren't unsual, but Sappho's poetry (the pieces which survived censorship for religious and cultural reasons) was love poetry from a woman to other women. Keeping in mind that in Ancient Greece this wasn't anything at all unusual since homosexuality was accepted as common, it's understandable that the word lesbian didn't see common use in its modern context until the 1800s.

During the 1800s, probably before 1870, the word lesbian began being used to describe women who had desires for other women. There was also the use of the term Sapphic, referring directly to Sappho, but it was eventually pushed aside in favor of lesbian. Perhaps because it rolled off the tongue better. But over time what began as a mere euphamism has become the word for the idea of a homosexual woman, even if people don't remember what the original context of the word was. The real irony of course is that the word comes from a time and a culture when debate over gay rights would have been ludicrous at best. Athens was renowned for homosexuality, and even the Spartans, the greatest soldiers in the world, were encouraged to support and love thy brother as a way to ensure that there was a unified fighting force that focused on defeating the enemy rather than who was having what sex with who.

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12055
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
A man born of the Greek isle of Lesbos emigrates to California. He is a lesbian.
The islands inhabitants don't have exclusive right to or use of the word "lesbian". They even lost a court case in Greece to prove it. You still seem to struggle with the concept of one word having multiple meanings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7520343.stm

“abstractions of thought...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12056
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait....waitaminit....did Little Terry do some homework? Why yes he did! Bravo Little Terry!
Unlike you, I always do my homework. That's probably why you make so many stupid and factually incorrect assertions in your posts.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12057
Oct 30, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite fascinating actually, you've inspire me to research. It's amazing what one finds, often accidentally. The use of the word "lesbian" to denote women who are sexually attracted to other women, is not that old. It's original meaning is to refer to the residents, men, women, and children, of the Greek isle of Lesbos.
http://voices.yahoo.com/the-origin-word-lesbi...
You really DON'T need to copy and paste from the link......just post the link and let others decide of they want to read it.......by the way......the word "Lesbian" was first used approximately in the 1800's, but became rather popular in the late 1960's and 70's:
http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/herstory/f/Le...

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12058
Oct 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Terra Firma wrote:
Acting as a individual, yes. When operating a business as a public accommodation, no. A business isn't invited to attend a wedding ceremony; it's paid to provide goods and services to customers.
And they declined to attend and serve a same sex wedding ceremony so they were sued. There is no tolerance on the left.

.
Terra Firma wrote:
Your advocacy of discrimination against and infringement of the fundamental rights of minority groups you dislike is the death of freedom.
I oppose the policies of the left, I don't dislike them. I've always written there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality.

.
Terra Firma wrote:
Freedom belongs to all citizens, not merely those who can garner majority support.
Many gays defend marriage as one man and one woman and I thank them for their support. Same sex marriage loses at the polls because gays understand this is an issue of radical social change, not defamation.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12059
Oct 31, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage loses at the polls because gays understand this is an issue of radical social change, not defamation.
You haven't been paying attention lately......we won at the polls or ballot box big time in 2012:-)

Gays, Lesbians and our supporters understand that being INCLUDED is not a radical social change.....it's the right thing to do because NO AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE DENIED THE RIGHT TO MARRY THE PERSON OF THEIR CHOOSING!!!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12061
Oct 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

NorCal Native wrote:
You haven't been paying attention lately......we won at the polls or ballot box big time in 2012:-) Gays, Lesbians and our supporters understand that being INCLUDED is not a radical social change.....it's the right thing to do because NO AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE DENIED THE RIGHT TO MARRY THE PERSON OF THEIR CHOOSING!!!
According to NorCal's argument, if a citizen wants to marry someone already married, a close relative or someone below the age of consent; that's their right.

Same sex marriage is so bad that its just the first step toward disaster.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 11,101 - 11,120 of17,568
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••