Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash...

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

There are 17562 comments on the NBC Chicago story from Jan 7, 2013, titled Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes. In it, NBC Chicago reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NBC Chicago.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#2850 Feb 23, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Not a single poster has disagreed with your sentiments. Yet nobody has provided even a broad outline of the changes they would like to support polygamous families. This suggests that those changes are more difficult than you imagine. As soon as someone does present a plan, listen for the screams from other polygamous families who don't want to be bound by those rules.
You're right, the govenment response to a marriage contract can handle the dual partnership quite well same sex or no, but is not equipped to handle more than two and there is no way any standarized method could ever be devised.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#2851 Feb 23, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
We can preempt the Supreme Court with a Constitutional Amendment that defines marriage as one man and one woman, like DOMA.
Well, let's see: There are now nine states with marriage equality that will not ratify your proposed amendment. New jersey apparently has enough votes to override Cristie's veto of marriage equality, so there's another state that won't ratify. Illinois looks like a done deal. So there's at least eleven equality states by the end of the year. The smart money is still on Rhode Island passing marriage equality this year. There's a good chance California will be rejoining the equality states this summer. And then there are quite credible moves in Minnesota, Delaware, and Hawaii.

No matter how you do the math, your idea comes up short. But please: Don't let facts or logic inhibit your thinking. It hasn't yet, so why start now?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#2852 Feb 23, 2013
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Perfectly understandable. Could you clear up my number one confusion, though? Do you SUPPORT legalized polygamy, or are you AGAINST it? You seem to frequently use the argument that, if we are going to consider legalizing marriage between same-sex couples, that we must ALSO simultaneously consider legalizing marriage between multiple partners.
I personally believe that marriage should remain, legally, a conjugal union of husband and wife. I also believe that there should be an alternative legal structure for SSCs, and other relationships. The plural marriage/polygamy issue raises, I think, challenges for SSM and their advocates. many of the same arguments used to advocate for legal SSM can also be used for consensual plural marriage. SSM advocates are inadvertently advocating for polygamy.
Does this mean that you are HOPING to get polygamy legalized one day? Or are you trying to forestall the same-sex marriage equality argument, by attempting to connect it to other causes, thereby insisting that gay-rights advocates must be advocates for causes that they may not support?
Gay rights advocates ARE advocating for polygamy whether they wish to admit it or not. What's good for the gay goose is good for the poly gander.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#2853 Feb 23, 2013
Pietro: How about addressing this from EdmondWA...

"Could you clear up my number one confusion, though? Do you SUPPORT legalized polygamy, or are you AGAINST it? You seem to frequently use the argument that, if we are going to consider legalizing marriage between same-sex couples, that we must ALSO simultaneously consider legalizing marriage between multiple partners.

Does this mean that you are HOPING to get polygamy legalized one day? Or are you trying to forestall the same-sex marriage equality argument, by attempting to connect it to other causes, thereby insisting that gay-rights advocates must be advocates for causes that they may not support?"

I believe I already know the answer, but would like to hear it from you...
Pat

Pekin, IL

#2854 Feb 23, 2013
RubyTheDyke wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right, the govenment response to a marriage contract can handle the dual partnership quite well same sex or no, but is not equipped to handle more than two and there is no way any standarized method could ever be devised.
Your statement is completely ludicrous. No significant percent of the homosexual population has ever 'married' in any country that allows it, but polygamy has a long and broad history. It was practiced among Native Americans until you white trash arrived and imposed your immorality. It is still practiced in many Islamic countries and was widespread in China and many other parts of Asia.

Polygamy has much more in common with marriage than anything homosexual ever will!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#2855 Feb 23, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Not a single poster has disagreed with your sentiments. Yet nobody has provided even a broad outline of the changes they would like to support polygamous families. This suggests that those changes are more difficult than you imagine. As soon as someone does present a plan, listen for the screams from other polygamous families who don't want to be bound by those rules.
Is it that much different now? Are there not Arguments over Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, and Same sex marriage?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#2856 Feb 23, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, let's see: There are now nine states with marriage equality that will not ratify your proposed amendment. New jersey apparently has enough votes to override Cristie's veto of marriage equality, so there's another state that won't ratify. Illinois looks like a done deal. So there's at least eleven equality states by the end of the year. The smart money is still on Rhode Island passing marriage equality this year. There's a good chance California will be rejoining the equality states this summer. And then there are quite credible moves in Minnesota, Delaware, and Hawaii.
No matter how you do the math, your idea comes up short. But please: Don't let facts or logic inhibit your thinking. It hasn't yet, so why start now?
"Marriage equality"....sounds very Orwellian utopian. Those states removed the conjugal foundation of marriage and replaced with a union of two persons. So what's next?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2857 Feb 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
I personally believe that marriage should remain, legally, a conjugal union of husband and wife.
That ship has sailed. Deny reality at your own peril.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2858 Feb 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Gay rights advocates ARE advocating for polygamy whether they wish to admit it or not.
Yes...... and apple pie advocates are promoting chocolate cake whether they wish to admit it or not.

You make no sense.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#2859 Feb 23, 2013
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>Your statement is completely ludicrous. No significant percent of the homosexual population has ever 'married' in any country that allows it, but polygamy has a long and broad history. It was practiced among Native Americans until you white trash arrived and imposed your immorality. It is still practiced in many Islamic countries and was widespread in China and many other parts of Asia.
Polygamy has much more in common with pmarriage than anything homosexual ever will!
Polygamy, specifically polygyny, is one of the two historic marital forms. Both incorporating the natural procreation sexual male female union. That is a fact.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2860 Feb 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy, specifically polygyny, is one of the two historic marital forms. Both incorporating the natural procreation sexual male female union. That is a fact.
So?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#2861 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>That ship has sailed. Deny reality at your own peril.
There's a new vessel following in the wake of the S.S. Rainbow, its the good ship Poly pop, on a trip to the altar stop.....

Do ya get it? Poly Pop? A Pop or father with many wives and kids.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#2862 Feb 23, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes...... and apple pie advocates are promoting chocolate cake whether they wish to admit it or not.
You make no sense.
Oh....but of course that makes sense. What a maroon.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#2863 Feb 23, 2013
Pat wrote:
<quoted text>Your statement is completely ludicrous. No significant percent of the homosexual population has ever 'married' in any country that allows it, but polygamy has a long and broad history. It was practiced among Native Americans until you white trash arrived and imposed your immorality. It is still practiced in many Islamic countries and was widespread in China and many other parts of Asia.
Polygamy has much more in common with marriage than anything homosexual ever will!
It doesn't make a freaking difference if only ONE gay couple in the world married-civil rights isn't a numbers game and as long as marriage is an entitlement program it should be applied as liberally as possible-institutions are to SERVE US, not the other way around. Marriage as it stands in those rights and benefits is built to accomodate the contract between two people so the inclusion of same sex couples requires NOTHING beyond its inclusion whereas polygamy is a bit more dicy when you consider powers of attory, secession of property, especially if each partner is to have equal standing in the marriage. Let me state for the record that I'm black, hispanic and Native American and as far as I can tell no Anglican has as much as pissed near our family tree, so don't include me in you ethhnic bitterness. Secondly I've stated over and over that personally I have no problem with polygamy, that if you who are interested in it quit your biching and do what same-sex marriage proponents have been doing: both prove your legal case and build public opinion in your favor. Comprende?
barry

Rainsville, AL

#2864 Feb 23, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
...
The "In Christ" phrase is invented by Paul. It never appears in any Gospel. As such, it is highly suspect. How can someone be "in Christ?" I find this phase to be trite and meaningless.
it really first appears in the writing of luke and also appears in 1Peter. hardly is exclusive to paul and no evidence that it was invented by paul.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#2865 Feb 23, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
I personally believe that marriage should remain, legally, a conjugal union of husband and wife. I also believe that there should be an alternative legal structure for SSCs, and other relationships. The plural marriage/polygamy issue raises, I think, challenges for SSM and their advocates. many of the same arguments used to advocate for legal SSM can also be used for consensual plural marriage. SSM advocates are inadvertently advocating for polygamy.
<quoted text>
Gay rights advocates ARE advocating for polygamy whether they wish to admit it or not. What's good for the gay goose is good for the poly gander.
Husband on life support but the prognosis is coma, limited brain function and no chance of recovery. One wife wants to remove him from life support, the other wife does not. Who should have the right of determination, given that each partner in legal standing are equal?
barry

Rainsville, AL

#2866 Feb 23, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Polygamy has nothing to do with the marriage equality issue. We are talking about marriage between two individuals....
how convenient from your point of view.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#2867 Feb 23, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
... How can someone be "in Christ?" I find this phase to be trite and meaningless.
much the same way that we use the phrase "in love".
salvation is a "death" to our old lifestyle of self-centered living and planting or submerging one's self in Christ. it starts with believing repenting and receiving by faith the truth of God's promise to us through Christ.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#2868 Feb 23, 2013
RubyTheDyke wrote:
<quoted text>
Husband on life support but the prognosis is coma, limited brain function and no chance of recovery. One wife wants to remove him from life support, the other wife does not. Who should have the right of determination, given that each partner in legal standing are equal?
Let me give you a hint: it can't. This requires an auxillary contract. In other words POLYGAMY IS A RED HERRING ISSUE because marriage has no value for it: it cannot accomplish the legal functions inherent in the contract for three or more people that it can accomplished for two.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#2869 Feb 23, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>much the same way that we use the phrase "in love".
salvation is a "death" to our old lifestyle of self-centered living and planting or submerging one's self in Christ. it starts with believing repenting and receiving by faith the truth of God's promise to us through Christ.
If you are receiving "the truth" by faith (that is, without any empirical evidence), then how do you know it's true?

If a competing and contradictory faith claim is made that also cannot be proven through evidence, on what basis do you reject it?

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 Supreme Court extends gay marriage nationwide 4 min NorCal Native 642
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 4 min Belle Sexton 5,501
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 6 min RiccardoFire 201,822
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 21 min Suculent-dry 34,127
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 34 min GayleWood 22,938
News Gay couple quickly granted marriage license aft... 42 min Mullahing It Over 46
News Refusing to Make Gay-Wedding Cake Costs Bakery ... 44 min Mullahing It Over 39
News Same-sex marriage fight turns to clerk who refu... 1 hr WasteWater 471
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 2 hr Frankie Rizzo 7,158
More from around the web