Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on ...

Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

There are 9647 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.

Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7311 Oct 4, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Not at all, there is no evidence you can council away someone's orientation. What could someone say to you that could change yours?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/aaro...

A Southern California college student who claims he reversed his own homosexuality with reparative therapy has filed a lawsuit against California for its ban on "gay cures."

Aaron Blitzer, of Culver City, is studying to be an ex-gay therapist and says, along with two other co-plaintiff therapists, that the ban prevents them from doing their job and infringes on their rights to free speech, privacy and freedom of religion, Gay Star News reports.

I thought you guys were into "FREEDOM"....

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#7312 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
it says our ability to procreate within the union is a reason marriage is protected...
not surprised you can't connect the dots...
better you just played with the icons dude...
You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.
No amount of your taking statements from court cases out of context and twisting them will change that.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#7313 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/aaro...
A Southern California college student who claims he reversed his own homosexuality with reparative therapy has filed a lawsuit against California for its ban on "gay cures."
Aaron Blitzer, of Culver City, is studying to be an ex-gay therapist and says, along with two other co-plaintiff therapists, that the ban prevents them from doing their job and infringes on their rights to free speech, privacy and freedom of religion, Gay Star News reports.
I thought you guys were into "FREEDOM"....
LOL. Should a licensed doctor be "free" to use bloodletting on his patients?

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7314 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
so that's how you feel about me asking you to indicate a good one?
you said some of these support you, WHICH ONES?
oh forget it, talk about your feelings with someone else, I could not get you to have a conversation of substance even when i lead you to the sources...
There's NO conversing with you.......you believe that you are right in everything you post and are unwilling to even look at another's view point......you've done it with anyone and everyone who has responded to you........except maybe those who might happen to agree with you.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7315 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/aaro...
A Southern California college student who claims he reversed his own homosexuality with reparative therapy has filed a lawsuit against California for its ban on "gay cures."
Aaron Blitzer, of Culver City, is studying to be an ex-gay therapist and says, along with two other co-plaintiff therapists, that the ban prevents them from doing their job and infringes on their rights to free speech, privacy and freedom of religion, Gay Star News reports.
I thought you guys were into "FREEDOM"....
What has this to do with the right to marry? If ya want to discuss that topic......go do so in that thread!!!

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#7317 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/aaro...
A Southern California college student who claims he reversed his own homosexuality with reparative therapy has filed a lawsuit against California for its ban on "gay cures."
Aaron Blitzer, of Culver City, is studying to be an ex-gay therapist and says, along with two other co-plaintiff therapists, that the ban prevents them from doing their job and infringes on their rights to free speech, privacy and freedom of religion, Gay Star News reports.
I thought you guys were into "FREEDOM"....
We are. That's why this story appears on our forum.
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7318 Oct 4, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
There's NO conversing with you.......you believe that you are right in everything you post and are unwilling to even look at another's view point......you've done it with anyone and everyone who has responded to you........except maybe those who might happen to agree with you.
not true. "Snyper" has made some good points as well as "not yet eqaul" when he was around..
just none of you do...

you want me to take how you feel as a fact and I am not willing to do so...

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7319 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
not true. "Snyper" has made some good points as well as "not yet eqaul" when he was around..
just none of you do...
you want me to take how you feel as a fact and I am not willing to do so...
That's all ya got......you think that all I have posted is just how I feel about this issue......lol!!!!
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7320 Oct 4, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
What has this to do with the right to marry? If ya want to discuss that topic......go do so in that thread!!!
it was a direct response to Rose's point...

So, is it alright with you if I respond to the points raised by other posters?(a little sarcasm for you, I know you just "love" it)
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7321 Oct 4, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's all ya got......you think that all I have posted is just how I feel about this issue......lol!!!!
yup, it is...

I guess now you are going to tell me how you feel about me saying that...
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7322 Oct 4, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL. Should a licensed doctor be "free" to use bloodletting on his patients?
I think a person is free to do what they wish with their bodies..I am surprised YOU don't think so...
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7323 Oct 4, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.
No amount of your taking statements from court cases out of context and twisting them will change that.
twisting?

there is no twisting that the Baker court laughed your "you dont have to procreate to marry" BS right out of the court...

here it is again for you:
"Petitioners note that the state does not impose upon heterosexual married couples a condition that they have a proved capacity or declared willingness to procreate, posing a rhetorical demand that this court must read such condition into the statute if same-sex marriages are to be prohibited. Even assuming that such a condition would be neither unrealistic nor offensive under the Griswold rationale, the classification is no more than theoretically imperfect. We are reminded, however, that "abstract symmetry" is not demanded by the Fourteenth Amendment."

Yup, no twisting, its right there, your argument sucks and blows...
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#7324 Oct 4, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>We are. That's why this story appears on our forum.
"our forum"?
you really do think you are special, don't you?
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#7325 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
it says our ability to procreate within the union is a reason marriage is protected...
not surprised you can't connect the dots...
better you just played with the icons dude...
Is procreation required for marriage in Vermont?

I'm not surprised that reality escapes you.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#7326 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
I think a person is free to do what they wish with their bodies..I am surprised YOU don't think so...
Dodge.
If a person wants to go to someone to pray away the gay, fine.
BUT a licensed professional should not be allowed to engage in quackery.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#7327 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
twisting?
there is no twisting that the Baker court laughed your "you dont have to procreate to marry" BS right out of the court...
You do have to be able to procreate in order to marry?
Jane Dough wrote:
here it is again for you:
"Petitioners note that the state does not impose upon heterosexual married couples a condition that they have a proved capacity or declared willingness to procreate, posing a rhetorical demand that this court must read such condition into the statute if same-sex marriages are to be prohibited. Even assuming that such a condition would be neither unrealistic nor offensive under the Griswold rationale, the classification is no more than theoretically imperfect. We are reminded, however, that "abstract symmetry" is not demanded by the Fourteenth Amendment."
Yup, no twisting, its right there, your argument sucks and blows...
Hmmm...must have missed where it said you have to be able to procreate in order to marry.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#7328 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
not true. "Snyper" has made some good points as well as "not yet eqaul" when he was around..
just none of you do...
you want me to take how you feel as a fact and I am not willing to do so...
fair enough. Then it's just as fair to point and laugh hysterically when you post your wild theory that allowing SSM will somehow end "responsible procreation".

You and Brain G are desperate. You'll throw reactionary mindless theory you can dream up onto the wall and hope some of it sticks.

We've been over this hundreds of times on dozens of threads. SSM won't affect heterosexual marriages or procreation. It doesn't "deny" a child of a mother or father anymore than divorce does. Each of you claims you don't wish to harm any gays or lesbians yet you both support Constitutional Amendment that clearly deny equal civil rights to groups you find "undesirable".

YOU especially like to trot out the "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN" slogan. The thing about that trap is that the harm those children may face isn't from their own families but from the way people like you will encourage others to treat those children.

Though I'm not black, I'm pretty sure most of them would agree that the same offensive slogan was used when inter-racial marriage and the resulting children was the issue.

I happen to have two nephews who are mixed race and even today they still face the same prejudice from folks like you that blacks faced in the 60's. What's worse is that often it comes from people who would otherwise be considered "liberals".

So don't tell ME our struggle for civil rights shouldn't be compared to what went on in the 60's. I live it everyday myself.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#7329 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
I think a person is free to do what they wish with their bodies..I am surprised YOU don't think so...
Well then I guess you don't have any objections to crack, heroin, smoking, PCP, prostitution, etc.

You can attempt to paint yourself as a paragon of virtue com-pared to RnL but if people carefully read most of the stuff you post, it's clear you are simply a combative bitter person with some really crazy theories.

One of my favorites is your "responsible procreation" schtick. The other is when you talk about how teaching children that gays and lesbians exist amounts to "recruiting".

That's one I have a hard time wrapping my brain around. If being gay or lesbian is so horrible and harmful how is an adult telling a child about gays and lesbians going to make it sound so desirable that they'd "choose that lifestyle".

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#7330 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
twisting?
there is no twisting that the Baker court laughed your "you dont have to procreate to marry" BS right out of the court...
here it is again for you:
"Petitioners note that the state does not impose upon heterosexual married couples a condition that they have a proved capacity or declared willingness to procreate, posing a rhetorical demand that this court must read such condition into the statute if same-sex marriages are to be prohibited. Even assuming that such a condition would be neither unrealistic nor offensive under the Griswold rationale, the classification is no more than theoretically imperfect. We are reminded, however, that "abstract symmetry" is not demanded by the Fourteenth Amendment."
Yup, no twisting, its right there, your argument sucks and blows...
Um Jane, the first sentence you quoted from the court decision does exactly the OPPOSITE of what you claim it does.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#7331 Oct 4, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
"our forum"?
you really do think you are special, don't you?
Jane there is a gay and lesbian forum on Topix. Hence my use of the word "our".

Would you be as arrogant and condescending on the African American forum in a reply to a black person?

I'm sure at some point your parents discussed the idea of being respectful to others with you. What else from their upbringing did you decide to ditch with your "me me me" lifestyle choice?

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 Boy Scouts suffer a setback in Supreme Court ov... (Oct '06) 4 min RecoveringRacist 322
News Richard Page, from Headcorn, loses case after b... 2 hr Abrahammock Relig... 1
News Oregon city council sorry after member says he'... 2 hr Abrahammock Relig... 3
News The gaydar machine: a backlash 2 hr Abrahammock Relig... 7
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 3 hr old_moose 13,219
Transgender "woman" convicted of raping 10-year... 3 hr Travis Turbil 3
News Australians embarrassed to be shown up by NZ on... 3 hr Frankie Rizzo 3
News Supreme Court To Hear Arguments In Case Of Bake... 4 hr Abrahammock Relig... 359
News College to offer sensitivity training after ant... 11 hr Abrahammock Relig... 9
News Stopping hate crimes against transgender Americans 16 hr Lewis 14
More from around the web