Gay-marriage ruling gives same-sex couples hope for Ohio

Jun 27, 2013 Read more: The Columbus Dispatch 19

Tom Morgan of Columbus takes a photo at the Union Cafe of Shannon Glatz, left, and Liberty Manos, both of Akron, who were married on Friday in Wash-ington, D.C. With the $50 fee and a bouquet of white roses in hand, Jimmie Beall and Mindy Ross raced into the Franklin County Courthouse yesterday to apply for a marriage license.

Read more

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#1 Jun 27, 2013
I wouldn't hold my breath. Ohio's Constitutional Amendment passed with 62% of the vote - a huge margin by election measures.
galler

Knoxville, TN

#2 Aug 12, 2013
dpx55 is right. Don't get your hopes up gay boyz.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3 Aug 12, 2013
dpx55 wrote:
I wouldn't hold my breath. Ohio's Constitutional Amendment passed with 62% of the vote - a huge margin by election measures.
Sweetie, I'll bet you don't realize this, but even amendments to state constitutions can be overturned. If the voters don't come to their senses, the federal courts will solve the problem. Same sex marriages will be coming to Ohio, whether you like it or not.
Resonable

Saint Paul, MN

#4 Aug 12, 2013
Now we have two definitions:

Marriage: the social institution of a Man and Woman in the form of Father Mother Children based on the natural order.

Gay Marriage: the social institution of Same Sex Couples based on Feelings.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#5 Aug 12, 2013
Resonable wrote:
Now we have two definitions:
Marriage: the social institution of a Man and Woman in the form of Father Mother Children based on the natural order.
Gay Marriage: the social institution of Same Sex Couples based on Feelings.
Can you prove that straight people don't marry because of feelings, but only to procreate? No love. No raising children.

Just creating them.

That seems very strange to the rest of us. I've never met a single straight person who has done that. Did you do it?

And why?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#6 Aug 12, 2013
galler wrote:
dpx55 is right. Don't get your hopes up gay boyz.
Odd post, since only half the gay population are "boys". Is there are reason you are fixated on males?
Resonable

Saint Paul, MN

#7 Aug 12, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you prove that straight people don't marry because of feelings, but only to procreate? No love. No raising children.
Just creating them.
That seems very strange to the rest of us. I've never met a single straight person who has done that. Did you do it?
And why?
So you want to go that route. Then answer me a simple question (no one else on your side will answer it)

Should a blood brother be allowed to marry a blood sister?

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#8 Aug 12, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Odd post, since only half the gay population are "boys". Is there are reason you are fixated on males?
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-cont...

Not exactly, and this is from your supporters.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#9 Aug 13, 2013
Resonable wrote:
<quoted text>
So you want to go that route. Then answer me a simple question (no one else on your side will answer it)
Should a blood brother be allowed to marry a blood sister?
No, because they are already related. There are valid reasons to prevent incest, as a rule. There are no such reasons for preventing unrelated gay and straight folks from marrying other unrelated adults. It's not really that hard to understand.

Marriage binds together only people who do not already share a biological family relationship.

Can you answer as to why only anti-gay folks seem to have trouble understanding the difference between people who are related, and those who are not related? It's a bit creepy to the rest of us.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#10 Aug 13, 2013
-The-Artist- wrote:
<quoted text>
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-cont...
Not exactly, and this is from your supporters.
There is nothing in that link that explains your fixation on males alone. Care to explain it?
Jordan Ashe

Cincinnati, OH

#11 Aug 13, 2013
There is no legitimate public interest in supporting adult hedonism.

There is a legitimate public interest in supporting the raising of children.

A public marriage license originated from the public interest in child raising, not adult hedonism as queers desire it to be.

The strongest argument against perv marriage is that sodomy and abortion proclivities of perverts are not worthy of a public subsidy via a marriage license.

In the not so distant past, local goverments and state governments could deny a marriage license for reasons that harm children....

sodomy
elective abortion
obscenity
child endangerment
mental deficiency
STD
moral turpitude

Perverts have used shyster lawyer methods and fedgov bullying to eliminate the power of local governments to impose minimum standards for acquiring a public marriage license. Pervert shysters used the same legal argument they used to get elective abortion legalized nationwide, the privacy argument.

Perverts have caused the problem of many bad marriages existing today, due to their deliberate crusade to eliminate minimum standards imposed by state and local government.

Perv shysters successfully lobbied to get elective abortion, sodomy, pornography, AIDS treatment, and hate speech prosecutions all recognized and protected as federal civil rights.

Pervs often refer to their proclivities as love, perverting language too. If you've been paying any attention, you'd notice that mass media never mention the word "sodomy" anymore. Mass media perverts refer to sodomy as anal sex or oral sex or deviant sex, perverting the original meaning of the word sex, a reproductive act. Likewise, elective abortion is referred to as a "reproductive right" by mass media queers.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#12 Aug 13, 2013
Jordan Ashe wrote:
There is no legitimate public interest in supporting adult hedonism.
I found the solution to your "issues":

http://www.mcbdds.org/index.php...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#13 Aug 13, 2013
dpx55 wrote:
I wouldn't hold my breath. Ohio's Constitutional Amendment passed with 62% of the vote - a huge margin by election measures.
Of course, fundamental rights may not be put to a vote, they depend upon the outcome of no elections. At least, according to the US Supreme Court in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette.

At issue here is whether the Ohio ban, and others like it, are fundamentally constitutional. Unless such a ban serves a compelling governmental interest, it is not constitutional, regardless of how popular it might be.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#14 Aug 13, 2013
Jordan Ashe wrote:
There is no legitimate public interest in supporting adult hedonism.
I assume you are calling same-sex partners hedonists. That would indicate that we chose our spouses purely for pleasure, since a hedonist believes that pleasure is the only intrinsic good. Personally, I do find pleasure in being married to my same-sex partner, but that pleasure is a by-product of our love and commitment to each other. Without that love there would be much less pleasure. I married my spouse out of love. Did you marry yours, assuming you are married, just for the sexual pleasure? If so, then you are he hedonist, not we.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#15 Aug 13, 2013
As a note to my above post. I doubt highly that hedonists would fight so hard for marriage-equality, since the pleasure of sex can be found outside marriage, and in wider variety of attractive partners. I know from experience. I'm much happier with the one man I have been with for over 40 years now.

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#16 Aug 13, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing in that link that explains your fixation on males alone. Care to explain it?
That was a different poster.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#18 Aug 13, 2013
Jerry Sandusky wrote:
(nothing worth repeating)
Get the help you so desperately need:

http://www.mcbdds.org/index.php...

Reply if you want, but as far as I am concerned, you have nothing more to say.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#20 Aug 13, 2013
Jordan Ashe wrote:
There is no legitimate public interest in supporting adult hedonism.
There is a legitimate public interest in supporting the raising of children.
...
Marriage is about hedonism? You have an odd view of marriage. I pity your spouse.

And, yes, marriage is a more secure place to raise children, and that applies equally to gay couples and their kids. If you believe that the tens of thousands of wonderful kids being raised by gay couples are better off with unmarried parents, please explain why.

Use only logic and statistics, please.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#21 Aug 13, 2013
-The-Artist- wrote:
<quoted text>
That was a different poster.
Ahh. Was a bit rushed.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Gay Marriage' Rooted in Fraud, Child Rape 2 min Festis 8
News Hillary Clinton has a new position on same-sex ... 2 min woodtick57 206
Are the mods fair and balanced? 5 min Frankie Rizzo 461
News Gay 'marriage': A recipe for anarchy 9 min RalphB 32
News Youths tackle gay marriage issue 13 min Wondering 2
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 22 min Frankie Rizzo 19,167
News Lawmakers Consider Gay Discrimination Policies 26 min Frankie Rizzo 2,610
News U.S. corporations pressure two states accused o... 2 hr doty 803
News Shop owner will deny - openly gay' customers 2 hr Brian_G 38
More from around the web