Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash...

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

There are 17552 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.

Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#4023 Mar 14, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
I think our "Francisco" is one of those people that are so outraged and indigent over this issue that they can't be bothered to actually THINK about their position before the leap to it.
What amuses me most about their favorite argument, the "All straight people will leave their spouses immediately and stop having sex forever and humanity will die out in one generation" bull-crap, is those idiots CLEARLY have NEVER been in love with another person. Hopefully they're not married to anyone if that's how little they value marriage or their partner.
I can't imagine anything other than death that would split up my marriage. I couldn't possibly care any less what anyone else does in or out of their marriage. Makes ZERO difference to me. I am 1,000% secure in my marriage and can't imagine that ever changing.
And yet.... all these idiots keep beating that same drum, "My marriage is weak and pointless!! If you get to be happy, I'll be forced to admit I'm not!! I hate the fact that you can be happy and I'm still single and angry!! I hate my spouse!! I'd leave my spouse in a hot second if I could!! How DARE you be happy when I'm such a loser??"
The beat goes on, I guess. They'll probably always be with us, won't they?
I'm telling you, he is PISSED because Vermont passed gay marriage against his recommendation. I mean, don't they know who he is?????????? How dare they ignore him??? So he comes here, makes the same simple-ass arguments he made in Vermont, thinking he can make a difference. hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Xavier Breath

West New York, NJ

#4024 Mar 14, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
So you're trying to ban homosexuals from marrying?
How on earth did you come to THAT ridiculous conclusion?????

People are NOT going to stop getting married and having babies..... Jesus Christ!
barry

Henagar, AL

#4025 Mar 14, 2013
01Justsayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Here.
"Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."
1 John 4:7-8
lovely.
the claim was that God was incapable of hate.
i posted scripture that clearly explains what god hates. so how does this post show that God is incapable of hating anything?
can not a person love what is good and hate what is evil?
who ever does not love is not of God.
it also could be said that whoever does not hate evil is not of God.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#4026 Mar 14, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
fine. already done!
because you are FLAT wrong and clearly ignorant of scotus caselaw wherein they connect procreation in ALL 14 marriage cases...why do you insist on being ill informed?
Go ahead and pout and prepare to scream bigotry when the scotus educates you on its history in a few months...
They mentioned procreation in several of those cases to make it clear that procreation is not required for marriage to remain a fundamental right of the individual. Turner made it clear even the ability to have sex is not required for marriage to remain a fundamental right. Children benefit from marriage. They are not required for it to remain a fundamental right.

And yet married same sex couples are raising children, both biologically related or adopted, just like many opposite sex couples. You demonstrate no benefit in treating them differently. It doesn't help opposite sex couples. It only harms same sex couple.

Clearly, only your position causes harm. This is the difference in our positions.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#4027 Mar 14, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
not true.
You want to end something the majority thinks is a benefit to society...
and that is the connection between marriage and responsible procreation.
Valid point.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#4028 Mar 14, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Then shouldn't you quit wasting your time kicking and crying over the 2-3% of couples that are same-sex and concentrate your efforts on the more than *50%* of heterosexual couples that can't be bothered to stay together more than an average of 4 years??
That is not I, married 20 plus years.....Johnny E. I agree more attention should be directed towards reducing divorce. "No fault" divorce isn't the great idea a generation or two later, as we were led to believe. So let's not screw things up further by redefining marriage.

What is the stay together rate for SSCs, male and female?
It seems to me that if your goal is to preserve marriages, your time would be far better spent trying to ban straight couples from divorcing every time the wind changes than wasting all this time screaming and crying about the gays.
You may have a point there. Partial point perhaps.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#4029 Mar 14, 2013
Francisco dAnconia wrote:
<quoted text>
not true.
You want to end something the majority thinks is a benefit to society...
and that is the connection between marriage and responsible procreation.
You fail to support your claim. Stating is not demonstrating it.

Treating same sex parent families equally under the current laws, while now supported by the majority, would not end whatever connection there may be between marriage and responsible procreation. While not a legal requirement, there is no reason to believe heterosexual people would become any more or less responsible by treating same sex couple families equally.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#4030 Mar 14, 2013
Quest wrote:
You are making some wild claims. Please provide the statistics that prove that gay folks marrying will IN ANY WAY stop straight folks form procreating.
I've NEVER claimed "gay folks marrying will IN ANY WAY stop straight folks form procreating"; those are Quest's words, not mine. I've claimed government rewards marriage because marriage provides a vital need to society, the next generation.

.
Quest wrote:
Then, prove that ANY infertile straight couple is banned from legally marrying because of that infertility.
Again, I've never claimed "ANY infertile straight couple is banned from legally marrying because of that infertility"; again, those are Quest's words, not mine. Though, couples have divorced on the grounds of not informing their partners of infertility.

.
Quest wrote:
Also, you should prove that gay couples are not raising many many thousands of wonderful children who will benefit from having married parents. Thanks.
Everyone of those "many thousands of wonderful children" raised by gay couples are raised motherless; I find that very sad. If you want a society that encourages people to raise their own children; keep marriage one man and one woman.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#4031 Mar 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I've NEVER claimed "gay folks marrying will IN ANY WAY stop straight folks form procreating"; those are Quest's words, not mine. I've claimed government rewards marriage because marriage provides a vital need to society, the next generation.
.
<quoted text>Again, I've never claimed "ANY infertile straight couple is banned from legally marrying because of that infertility"; again, those are Quest's words, not mine. Though, couples have divorced on the grounds of not informing their partners of infertility.
.
<quoted text>Everyone of those "many thousands of wonderful children" raised by gay couples are raised motherless; I find that very sad. If you want a society that encourages people to raise their own children; keep marriage one man and one woman.
It has nothing to do with the sex of the parents, most children up for adoption have neither a father or a mother. There are also many single mothers AND some children WITH mothers might be better off with out one. I find it sad that you can generalize so many people based on sexual identity.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#4032 Mar 14, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
It has nothing to do with the sex of the parents, most children up for adoption have neither a father or a mother. There are also many single mothers AND some children WITH mothers might be better off with out one. I find it sad that you can generalize so many people based on sexual identity.
Agreed.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#4033 Mar 14, 2013
The fallacy here is to create a requirement same sex couples can't possibly meet, ignoring that requirement is not a requirement of law, not supported by the science that says same sex parents do just as well, nor a reflection of real life for a significant segment of the population. It ignores that gay couples are rasing children either biologically related or adopted, as well as the fact procreation isn't a requirement.

This also ignores that gay couples are similarly situated in all respects except for the possibility of having unwanted, unplanned babies.

It relies on pejorative terminology and other bumper sticker emotional appeals that ignore the facts.

Yet it all fails to provide any rational, legitimate governmental interest sufficient for harming same sex couples by denial of equal treatment under the law.

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#4034 Mar 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Government benefits marriage because it provides a vital need, the next generation of taxpayers. Same sex couples can't provide that benefit so they aren't entitled to marriage benefits.
Well, stupid, why don't they only benefit people who have spawned?

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#4035 Mar 14, 2013
Jon wrote:
<quoted text>Justsaying anyone is a bigot who disagrees with your horrible hate based movement is no logical argument! Homosexual 'marriage' is a complete fraud.
David M! Hate based? A desire for marriage and equal rights is hate based!?
David wrote:
It has been overwhelmingly rejected by homosexuals as an actual practice in every country that allows it, and studies have shown that most such 'marriages' aren't even exclusive arrangements.
No homosexual relationship shares the reasons for government involvement in real marriage. No child is ever born as a direct result and no such relationship can provide a child with a father and mother.
David, why do you homophobes keep bringing up this non issue? You don't have to be able to reproduce in order to marry.
David wrote:
Homosexual 'marriage,' where legal, isn't even a basic building block of homosexual society, much less of society as a whole. There is no standardized format for homosexual 'marriages,' and no economically unequal genders are involved.
Why not forget about disenfranchising others in order for force your concocted, failed philosophy into law? Why not try a little live and let live?
LOL! Why don't you? Don't like the idea of gay marriage? Don't marry someone of the same sex!

Since: Apr 11

Panorama City, CA

#4036 Mar 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I've NEVER claimed "gay folks marrying will IN ANY WAY stop straight folks form procreating"; those are Quest's words, not mine. I've claimed government rewards marriage because marriage provides a vital need to society, the next generation.
You don't have to be able to procreate in order to marry.
It's that simple, stupid.

.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Again, I've never claimed "ANY infertile straight couple is banned from legally marrying because of that infertility"; again, those are Quest's words, not mine. Though, couples have divorced on the grounds of not informing their partners of infertility.
Is that why you divorced?

.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Everyone of those "many thousands of wonderful children" raised by gay couples are raised motherless; I find that very sad. If you want a society that encourages people to raise their own children; keep marriage one man and one woman.
I find it sad that a jerk like you raised a kid. Your genitals don't matter. A kid would be better off on the street turning tricks for drugs than living with you as a father. Even if there is shared custody.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4037 Mar 14, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I've NEVER claimed "gay folks marrying will IN ANY WAY stop straight folks form procreating"; those are Quest's words, not mine. I've claimed government rewards marriage because marriage provides a vital need to society, the next generation.
.
<quoted text>Again, I've never claimed "ANY infertile straight couple is banned from legally marrying because of that infertility"; again, those are Quest's words, not mine. Though, couples have divorced on the grounds of not informing their partners of infertility.
.
<quoted text>Everyone of those "many thousands of wonderful children" raised by gay couples are raised motherless; I find that very sad. If you want a society that encourages people to raise their own children; keep marriage one man and one woman.
That's alright Brian good buddy, nobody takes your posts seriously.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#4038 Mar 15, 2013
Uve wrote:
It has nothing to do with the sex of the parents, most children up for adoption have neither a father or a mother. There are also many single mothers AND some children WITH mothers might be better off with out one. I find it sad that you can generalize so many people based on sexual identity.
It would be hard to make the case that fast food, plastic bags and cigarettes do more damage than single motherhood.

-- Controlling for socioeconomic status, race and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single mother.

-- At least 70 percent of juvenile murderers, pregnant teenagers, high school dropouts, teen suicides, runaways and juvenile delinquents were raised by single mothers.

-- A study back in 1990 by the Progressive Policy Institute showed that, absent single motherhood, there would be no difference in black and white crime rates.

Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-03-13....

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#4039 Mar 15, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
<quoted text>
They mentioned procreation in several of those cases to make it clear that procreation is not required for marriage to remain a fundamental right of the individual. Turner made it clear even the ability to have sex is not required for marriage to remain a fundamental right. Children benefit from marriage. They are not required for it to remain a fundamental right.
The key word here is "individual", not how marriage is viewed, defined, and understood, by society, and the state as whole. That's the point. Consumation, procreation, conception, and presumption of paternity are all terms referencing the male female marital sexual union, a union that produce children, even ones who grow up and post on internet forums under the moniker of "Not Yet Equal". Is that a family name? Were you named after your father, Mr. Notyetequal?
And yet married same sex couples are raising children, both biologically related or adopted, just like many opposite sex couples. You demonstrate no benefit in treating them differently. It doesn't help opposite sex couples. It only harms same sex couple.
The are treated differently, because, surprise, they are different. You can't seperate the sexes, place them in two duplicate sex unions, one male, one female, and argue it the same as if they had remained in one opposite sex union.

What specific harm are you referring to?
Clearly, only your position causes harm. This is the difference in our positions.
What specific harm is that?

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#4040 Mar 15, 2013
"I respect people who disagree with me on certain things, but they have to respect me too," [] "Just because I believe states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot. Just because we believe life – all life – is worthy of protection at every stage of its development does not make you a chauvinist."

"The people who are actually closed minded in American politics are the people who love to preach about the certainty of science in regards to our climate but ignore the absolute fact that science has proven that life begins at conception,"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/...

Has anyone found a full text of Senator Rubio's speech?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#4041 Mar 15, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>It would be hard to make the case that fast food, plastic bags and cigarettes do more damage than single motherhood.
.....
Then support MARRIAGE, instead of trying to require that certain kids have unmarried parents, despite their parent's wish to legally marry.

And are you REALLY posting things from Ann Counter?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#4042 Mar 15, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
"I respect people who disagree with me on certain things, but they have to respect me too," [] "Just because I believe states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot......."
.
You - or Rubio - would only be a bigot if you try to create or preserve laws that harm American families, with no government interest in that harm.

Your personal opinions should end at my front door. Keep your irrational hatreds and beliefs in your own homes, and no one will call you a bigot.

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 Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 3 min guest 1,480
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr Respect71 48,016
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 4 hr South Knox Hombre 5,586
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 6 hr parent 26,071
News Lesbian pastor, United Methodist Church agree t... (Aug '16) 7 hr 93James 41
News Gay pastor fights censure by United Methodist C... 7 hr 93James 153
Maybe god is gay! (Dec '09) 9 hr June VanDerMark 13,375
More from around the web