Rep. Carole Murray Votes 'Yes' On Col...

Rep. Carole Murray Votes 'Yes' On Colorado Civil Unions Bill, Explains Why In Emotional Speech

There are 73 comments on the www.huffingtonpost.com story from Mar 1, 2013, titled Rep. Carole Murray Votes 'Yes' On Colorado Civil Unions Bill, Explains Why In Emotional Speech. In it, www.huffingtonpost.com reports that:

A Republican state representative may have befuddled some in her conservative region after she voted "yes" on Colorado's civil unions bill.

Rep. Carole Murray represents Colorado's District 45 -- a Republican friendly region sandwiched between Denver and Colorado Springs -- and she has a conservative voting record to match.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.huffingtonpost.com.

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#25 Mar 3, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is saying that gay people should "settle" for civil unions, but they ARE a stepping stone. The fight won't end until complete marriage equality is achieved, everywhere in this country.
But, if YOUR family's security is at risk with having no protections at all, are you saying that you would keep them at risk rather than accept the less than optimal protections a CU provides?
Sorry, I would take what I could get, since where I live I can get NOTHING - my family comes before pride. In my state, a CU might be the only thing that could pass, at least for awhile.
when you find out that your civil unions have less value than the durable powers and other related documents that I hold you'll come to realize it was a waste of time and the politicians that's offering is saying you can get on the bus but have to sit in the back

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#26 Mar 3, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
when you find out that your civil unions have less value than the durable powers and other related documents that I hold you'll come to realize it was a waste of time and the politicians that's offering is saying you can get on the bus but have to sit in the back
It's your choice not to have a civil union.

Why do you feel it necessary to attempt to deny that choice to others?

Sounds a lot like what the anti-gays do.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#27 Mar 3, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
when you find out that your civil unions have less value than the durable powers and other related documents that I hold you'll come to realize it was a waste of time and the politicians that's offering is saying you can get on the bus but have to sit in the back
I agree.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#28 Mar 3, 2013
I'll consider getting a "civil union" when I can get into a line of heteros applying for them.

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#29 Mar 3, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
It's your choice not to have a civil union.
Why do you feel it necessary to attempt to deny that choice to others?
Sounds a lot like what the anti-gays do.
Because it has no value,it's something there throwing at us hopping we shut the f*ck about marriage, Tell me would you be satisfied with a domestic partnership

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#30 Mar 3, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it has no value,it's something there throwing at us hopping we shut the f*ck about marriage, Tell me would you be satisfied with a domestic partnership
I agree.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#31 Mar 3, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
That's because you're a complete moron.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#32 Mar 3, 2013
snyper wrote:
I'll consider getting a "civil union" when I can get into a line of heteros applying for them.
That's your choice.

Don't deny others the same opportunity to make the choice of what's best for them & their family.

That's what the anti-gays do.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#33 Mar 3, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it has no value,it's something there throwing at us hopping we shut the f*ck about marriage, Tell me would you be satisfied with a domestic partnership
Now you're just denying history. We used civil unions and/or domestic partnerships in VT, NH, CT, WA, & ME as a springboard to marriage equality. We're doing the same right now in IL, DE, RI, & NJ.

While civil unions may have no value to YOU, there are many people who need the rights & benefits they provide until marriage is a realistic option in their state. Obviously it's up to each individual to decide if it has value to THEM.

Attempting to deny others the ability to decide for themselves how to best protect themselves and their family is what the anti-gays support.

I chose to get married in Massachusetts because both civil unions & marriage are banned in Michigan. The point is that choice should be left to the individual based on their needs; not banned just because it's not marriage.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#34 Mar 3, 2013
Btw, once DOMA is overturned in June, that will push the remaining states with civil unions or domestic partnerships to push for marriage because at that point civil unions WON'T provide the same benefits as marriage.

That will likely be the "push" needed to pass marriage in RI, and get the NJ legislature to override Christie's veto. It will also have a significant effect on the votes likely to happen in OR, CO, HI, etc over the next couple of years.

Once that happens, then civil unions likely won't even be considered anymore.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#36 Mar 3, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's your choice.
Don't deny others the same opportunity to make the choice of what's best for them & their family.
That's what the anti-gays do.
Sometimes, it's necessary to take a few of ours aside and instruct them to get with the program.

We don't need quislings.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#37 Mar 3, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Sometimes, it's necessary to take a few of ours aside and instruct them to get with the program.
We don't need quislings.
EXACTLY what Uncle Joe stalin, and his desciple, The Obamaniac said !

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#38 Mar 3, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
EXACTLY what Uncle Joe stalin, and his desciple, The Obamaniac said !
I always thought that you smelled a bit Vichy.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#39 Mar 3, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
I always thought that you smelled a bit Vichy.
I'ma a Libertarian.

:)

The Obamanic is a Joe Stalin-worshipper.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#40 Mar 3, 2013
And I hate the French !

FREEDOM FRIES FOREVER !

:)

“MiamiCorrupt├»┬╗┬┐”

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#41 Mar 3, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
And I hate the French !
FREEDOM FRIES FOREVER !
:)
I recall when that french fry nonsense began, it was right before the Iraq invasion when the French insisted that Saddam did not have WMD .They were correct.

Oreilly than went on same tangent about changing the name of french fries. Initially he called them freedom fries than I forgot what other name.

That was when I used to watch him but outgrew his "Booogie man is coming" stupidity.

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#42 Mar 4, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's because you're a complete moron.
Foxie is not a complete moron, he's a stupid idiot there are differences

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#44 Mar 4, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
when you find out that your civil unions have less value than the durable powers and other related documents that I hold you'll come to realize it was a waste of time and the politicians that's offering is saying you can get on the bus but have to sit in the back
As anyone who relies on taking the bus to get to distant places can tell you, most prefer the bus at least stop and have a seat for us rather than to have it just drive past us.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#45 Mar 4, 2013
snyper wrote:
I'll consider getting a "civil union" when I can get into a line of heteros applying for them.
I believe in this case the civil unions would be available to heterosexuals as well.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#46 Mar 4, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
I always thought that you smelled a bit Vichy.
LOL. That one sure has DeGualle to act Vichy.

OY!

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 Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 3 min Pietro Armando 8,778
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 11 min Belle Sexton 34,838
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 11 min tongangodz 7,236
News I am a gay Yankee teacher in the South 24 min Silent Echo 11
News Same-sex marriage fight turns to clerk who refu... 26 min Messenger 3,100
News Supreme Court rules against clerk in gay marria... 27 min Belle Sexton 33
News Lord Montagu dead: Fast cars and gay rights - a... 37 min Christsharia Law 1
News Kentucky clerk defies order, refuses to issue s... 40 min NorCal Native 372
News 4 GOP candidates sign anti-gay marriage pledge 2 hr woodtick57 297
News Court: Baker who refused gay wedding cake can't... 2 hr WasteWater 1,168
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr NoahLovesU 25,785
More from around the web