Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on ...

Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

There are 9646 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.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#9819 Jan 10, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Some gay men are promiscuous while some are not. Some straight men are, some are not.
Really? That's your answer? Some are...some aren't?

Did you know that gay men account for 61% of new HIV infections. Why? Because they are statistically quite promiscuous.

Does that mean all gays are promiscuous? No. Does it have anything to do with gay marriage? No.

But it is the truth. Just be honest.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#9820 Jan 10, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
The easy way to avoid the mess it to allow everyone to participate equally under the laws currently in effect. That keeps marriage as marriage for everyone.
And that is exactly what has happened in those jurisdictions that recognize marriage equality. Straight marriages have not changed, and gay couples are treated equally under the same laws, as required by the constitution.
What's "marriage equality"? You guys crack me up with your terms! Great PR work. Keep it up!

But I have to say in your case you go way overboard. Sometimes I think you are just looking for an opportunity to use the word "equal" as many times as possible in each post. You got it four times in this brief little post. Hooray!!

Do you really think people are that stupid?

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#9821 Jan 11, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
I'm not sure why you keep refering[sic] back to that union with such a disasterous[sic] end to prove you point. He should have married Bosie.
His two sons, Cyril Wilde and Vyvyan Oscar Beresford Wilde disagree. Oscar Wilde was a devoted and loving father and his son's childhoods were happy. If he hadn't married Constance Lloyd, I doubt his children would have been born.

I find Oscar Wilde's disastrous end a perfect allegory for same sex marriage; it would harm homosexuals more than everyone else.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9822 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
I find Oscar Wilde's disastrous end a perfect allegory for same sex marriage; it would harm homosexuals more than everyone else.
You really are determined to make yourself into the village idiot, aren't you? Obviously, Oscar and Bosie didn't marry or live together.

I can't say what would have happened if their relationship had been accepted by society. Perhaps they would have adopted some children in need. Perhaps they would have led a Bohemian lifestyle. But we do know that throwing Wilde into jail didn't do him any good.

If his marriage was so good, why was he carrying on with men and getting himself into trouble?

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#9823 Jan 11, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
You really are determined to make yourself into the village idiot, aren't you? Obviously, Oscar and Bosie didn't marry or live together.
I can't say what would have happened if their relationship had been accepted by society. Perhaps they would have adopted some children in need. Perhaps they would have led a Bohemian lifestyle. But we do know that throwing Wilde into jail didn't do him any good.
If his marriage was so good, why was he carrying on with men and getting himself into trouble?
Perhaps they both would have been thrown in jail.

That doesn't change the fact, Wilde fathered two sons. If he hadn't married Constance, they wouldn't have been born.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#9824 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Perhaps they both would have been thrown in jail.
That doesn't change the fact, Wilde fathered two sons. If he hadn't married Constance, they wouldn't have been born.
Not necessarily true......remember a couple doesn't have to be married to have children!!!!

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#9825 Jan 11, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
Not necessarily true......remember a couple doesn't have to be married to have children!!!!
The purpose of marriage is so your kids won't be bastards.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#9826 Jan 11, 2013
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
My marriage will not be changed.
No one is trying to teach that there are gay people. That is silly and unnecessary. The teaching I link to is nothing more than an attempt to mold the ideas society has towards gays in future generations. Welcome to the gay agenda.
As for the denial of equal rights...we already have them. Our sexual thoughts and feelings don't entitle either of us to any special rights. The laws apply to us both equally.
It seems you continue to ignore that the legal marriages of gay people are not treated equally to the same legal marriages of straight people from the same jurisdiction.

This is not equal treatment under the law.
straight shooter

Barre, VT

#9827 Jan 11, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
It seems you continue to ignore that the legal marriages of gay people are not treated equally to the same legal marriages of straight people from the same jurisdiction.
This is not equal treatment under the law.
different situations get different rights...
equal treatment, not equal rights is all you get...

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#9828 Jan 11, 2013
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
No one has the "fundamental right" to marry their own sex. That is not what marriage is.
That training is not designed to simply curtail bullying at all. It is designed to teach other people's kids that homosexuality is normal and amoral. The bullying angle is just a ruse.
Your perspective is one of someone who has never been bullied for being a gay person. I know better, both from personal experience and from working with young people.

Gay people still face harassment, especially in schools, and many have not yet developed the coping skills needed to deal with it. If you doubt anti-gay bullying still takes place, you are not reading these threads or the articles that demonstrate hate crimes still take place here and around the world.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9829 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Perhaps they both would have been thrown in jail.
That doesn't change the fact, Wilde fathered two sons. If he hadn't married Constance, they wouldn't have been born.
Just curious: In what ways do you think the world would have been worse off if Oscar and Bosie had taken two children out of orphanages instead of procreating with women who didn't satisfy them?

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#9830 Jan 11, 2013
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? That's your answer? Some are...some aren't?
Did you know that gay men account for 61% of new HIV infections. Why? Because they are statistically quite promiscuous.
Does that mean all gays are promiscuous? No. Does it have anything to do with gay marriage? No.
But it is the truth. Just be honest.
In the spirit of honesty, remember "promiscuity" is being used here (and elsewhere) to justify denial of equal treatment under the law.

Yet there are more promiscuous straight men, while many gay men are not, and the majority of gay men do not have HIV. Using the excuse of promiscuity and HIV to deny legal equality for all gay people also ignores these stats do not apply to gay women, yet are used to deny equality to gay women, who are the lowest risk group for HIV.

This is just one more excuse that is easily exposed as irrational when examined.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#9831 Jan 11, 2013
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
What's "marriage equality"? You guys crack me up with your terms! Great PR work. Keep it up!
But I have to say in your case you go way overboard. Sometimes I think you are just looking for an opportunity to use the word "equal" as many times as possible in each post. You got it four times in this brief little post. Hooray!!
Do you really think people are that stupid?
"Marriage equality" means treating gay people the same under the same laws currently in effect for straight people. Because all of the same legal rules apply, "marriage equality" is a more accurate term than the others commonly employed.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#9832 Jan 11, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
Just curious: In what ways do you think the world would have been worse off if Oscar and Bosie had taken two children out of orphanages instead of procreating with women who didn't satisfy them?
Oscar Wilde had two children by his wife Constance; why do you say he wasn't satisfied? Boise, Lord Alfred Douglas married his close friend, Olive Eleanor Custance and they one son, Raymond Wilfred Sholto Douglas; what's unsatisfying about having children?

I don't want to play,'what if'; the facts speak for themselves. Homosexuals have always married under the same laws as everyone else. That's equal rights. Gender apartheid is a 'special right' not found in our Constitution.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#9833 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The purpose of marriage is so your kids won't be bastards.
Sorry, but that is NOT now or EVER been the sole purpose of Marriage!!!!

What a nasty thing to say about children!!!

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#9834 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Oscar Wilde had two children by his wife Constance; why do you say he wasn't satisfied? Boise, Lord Alfred Douglas married his close friend, Olive Eleanor Custance and they one son, Raymond Wilfred Sholto Douglas; what's unsatisfying about having children?
I don't want to play,'what if'; the facts speak for themselves. Homosexuals have always married under the same laws as everyone else. That's equal rights. Gender apartheid is a 'special right' not found in our Constitution.
There is a difference between having sex to procreate and getting pleasure from having sex with a woman who you're not attracted to.....otherwise, neither of them would have strayed from their satisfied marriages!!!

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#9835 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Oscar Wilde had two children by his wife Constance; why do you say he wasn't satisfied? Boise, Lord Alfred Douglas married his close friend, Olive Eleanor Custance and they one son, Raymond Wilfred Sholto Douglas; what's unsatisfying about having children?
I don't want to play,'what if'; the facts speak for themselves. Homosexuals have always married under the same laws as everyone else. That's equal rights. Gender apartheid is a 'special right' not found in our Constitution.
Indeed, the facts do speak for themselves: Life married to a woman was completely unsatisfactory for Mr. Wilde who died much too young.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#9836 Jan 11, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The purpose of marriage is so your kids won't be bastards.
Who cares? All kinds of people have kids without being married. Why do you call them bastards? That isn't very nice.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#9837 Jan 12, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
It seems you continue to ignore that the legal marriages of gay people are not treated equally to the same legal marriages of straight people from the same jurisdiction.
This is not equal treatment under the law.
States have the right to define their own marriage laws. Neither you nor I have the right to marry a man in Mass and then have that union be recognized in Texas. The law applies equally to us both.

As for DOMA I likely agree with you. If the people of Colorado decided they want to redefine marriage the Feds must honor it.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#9838 Jan 12, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
Your perspective is one of someone who has never been bullied for being a gay person. I know better, both from personal experience and from working with young people.
Gay people still face harassment, especially in schools, and many have not yet developed the coping skills needed to deal with it. If you doubt anti-gay bullying still takes place, you are not reading these threads or the articles that demonstrate hate crimes still take place here and around the world.
Of course bullying of gays and others exist. Dealing with the bullying behavior is the answer to that problem. Teaching other people's kids your ideas about sexuality is not.

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.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 38 min Rebirth 70 1,779,028
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 4 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 40,545
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... (Nov '16) 4 hr Cassandra_ 10,012
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 7 hr qz-zq 243,563
News Voter ID ruling a disservice to too many people (Apr '08) 16 hr MurphyMobile 180
News Joy Behar: a woman with a view (Nov '08) Jun 15 howtosayjoybehar 115
News Mitch McConnell makes history as longest servin... Jun 14 Kentucky illiterates 6