Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash...

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

There are 17556 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.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8405 Aug 18, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>it didn't disappear, Petey it was never reality. just your leave it to beaver wishes of what marriageand society is or was...
Gee Wally, it sure does look like marriage and having kids are connected....even back to the mid 1800's.

Let me guess Woody, you were delivered by the Forrest stork.

From U.S. law.

“[T]he first purpose of matrimony, by the laws of nature and society, is procreation.” Baker v. Baker, 13 Cal. 87, 103 (1859).“he procreation of children under the shield and sanction of the law” is one of the “two principal ends of marriage.” Sharon v. Sharon, 75 Cal. 1 (1888)(quoting Stewart on Marriage and Divorce, sec. 103.“Procreation, if not the sole, is at least an important, reason for the existence of the marriage relation.” Davis v. Davis, 106 A. 644, 645 (N.J. Ch. Div. 1919).“The great end of matrimony is ... the procreation of a progeny having a legal title to maintenance by the father.” Laudo v. Laudo, 197 N.Y.S. 396, 397 (App. Div. 1919); Poe v. Gerstein, 517 F.2d 787, 796 (5th Cir. 1975)(“[P]rocreation of offspring could be considered one of the major purposes of marriage....”); Singer v. Hara, 522 P.2d 1187, 1195 (Wash. App. 1974)(“[M]arriage exists as a protected legal institution primarily because of societal values associated with the propagation of the human race.”); Baker v. Nelson, 191 N.W.2d 185, 186 (Minn. 1971), appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)(“The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”); Heup v. Heup, 172 N.W.2d 334, 336 (Wis. 1969)(“Having children is a primary purpose of marriage.”); Zoglio v. Zoglio, 157 A.2d 627, 628 (D.C. App. 1960)(“One of the primary purposes of matrimony is procreation.”); Frost v. Frost, 181 N.Y.S.2d 562, 563 (Supr. Ct. New York Co. 1958)(discussing “one of the primary purposes of marriage, to wit, the procreation of the human species.”); Ramon v. Ramon, 34 N.Y.S. 2d 100, 108 (Fam. Ct. Div. Richmond Co. 1942)(“The procreation of off-spring under the natural law being the object of marriage, its permanency is the foundation of the social order.”); Stegienko v. Stegienko, 295 N.W. 252, 254 (Mich. 1940)(stating that “procreation of children is one of the important ends of matrimony”); Gard v. Gard, 169 N.W. 908, 912 (Mich. 1918)(“It has been said in many of the cases cited that one of the great purposes of marriage is procreation.”); Lyon v. Barney, 132 Ill. App. 45, 50 (1907)(“[T]he procreating of the human species is regarded, at least theoretically, as the primary purpose of marriage ...”); Grover v. Zook, 87 P.638, 639 (Wash. 1906)(“One of the most important functions of wedlock is the procreation of children.”); Adams v. Howerton, 486 F. Supp. 1119, 1124 (C.D. Cal. 1980), aff’d 673 F.2d 1036 (9th Cir. 1982)(observing that a “state has a compelling interest in encouraging and fostering procreation of the race”);

A New Jersey court waxed lyrical on this point:“Lord Penzance has observed that the procreation of children is one of the ends of marriage. I do not hesitate to say that it is the most important object of matrimony, for without it the human race itself would perish from the earth.” Turney v. Avery, 113 A. 710, 710 (N.J. Ch. 1921)

Some evidence on the anthropological point:“Although the details of getting married – who chooses the mates, what are the ceremonies and exchanges, how old are the parties – vary from group to group, the principle of marriage is everywhere embodied in practice.... The unique trait of what is commonly called marriage is social recognition and approval ... of a couple’s engaging in sexual intercourse and bearing and rearing offspring.” Kingsley Davis (ed.), Contemporary Marriage: Comparative Perspectives on a Changing Institution (New York: Russell Sage Foundation)(1985).

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8406 Aug 18, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>let me be very clear here, Petey...
i clearly referred to the argument that all have the same right to marry. that argument was, in fact, used in the anti interracial marriage issue. it failed then it is failing now when you use it.
what , exactly, aren't you clear about this?
You continue to ignore the obvious, race and gender are two different characteristics, the former has no bearing on the common legal, cultural, social, historical, and/or religious understanding of marriage as a monogamous union of husband and wife. While the latter requires a redefinition on the part of those who make the claim the prohibition is the same.

Remember interracial marriage did exist in various parts of the country, at various times. Legal SSM is less than 10 years old in this country.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#8407 Aug 19, 2013
I'm advocating granting political asylum to Russian gays harmed by Putin's anti-free speech laws. Let American gays see what real bigotry looks like and they won't be so quick to demean the word by using it to label all the left's political opponents. Keeping marriage one man and one woman is care and respect for everyone while we cherish the laws that keep civilization working. Wait a few generations before leaping to radical new social formulas.

GrouchoMarxist

“These are a few.....”

Since: May 10

of my fav~o~rite things~~

#8408 Aug 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee Wally, it sure does look like marriage and having kids are connected....even back to the mid 1800's.
Let me guess Woody, you were delivered by the Forrest stork.
From U.S. law.
“[T]he first purpose of matrimony, by the laws of nature and society, is procreation.” Baker v. Baker, 13 Cal. 87, 103 (1859).“he procreation of children under the shield and sanction of the law” is one of the “two principal ends of marriage.” Sharon v. Sharon, 75 Cal. 1 (1888)(quoting Stewart on Marriage and Divorce, sec. 103.“Procreation, if not the sole, is at least an important, reason for the existence of the marriage relation.” Davis v. Davis, 106 A. 644, 645 (N.J. Ch. Div. 1919).“The great end of matrimony is ... the procreation of a progeny having a legal title to maintenance by the father.” Laudo v. Laudo, 197 N.Y.S. 396, 397 (App. Div. 1919); Poe v. Gerstein, 517 F.2d 787, 796 (5th Cir. 1975)(“[P]rocreation of offspring could be considered one of the major purposes of marriage....”); Singer v. Hara, 522 P.2d 1187, 1195 (Wash. App. 1974)(“[M]arriage exists as a protected legal institution primarily because of societal values associated with the propagation of the human race.”); Baker v. Nelson, 191 N.W.2d 185, 186 (Minn. 1971), appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question, 409 U.S. 810 (1972)(“The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”); Heup v. Heup, 172 N.W.2d 334, 336 (Wis. 1969)(“Having children is a primary purpose of marriage.”); Zoglio v. Zoglio, 157 A.2d 627, 628 (D.C. App. 1960)(“One of the primary purposes of matrimony is procreation.”); Frost v. Frost, 181 N.Y.S.2d 562, 563 (Supr. Ct. New York Co. 1958)(discussing “one of the primary purposes of marriage, to wit, the procreation of the human species.”); Ramon v. Ramon, 34 N.Y.S. 2d 100, 108 (Fam. Ct. Div. Richmond Co. 1942)(“The procreation of off-spring under the natural law being the object of marriage, its permanency is the foundation of the social order.”); Stegienko v. Stegienko, 295 N.W. 252, 254 (Mich. 1940)(stating that “procreation of children is one of the important ends of matrimony”); Gard v. Gard, 169 N.W. 908, 912 (Mich. 1918)(“It has been said in many of the cases cited that one of the great purposes of marriage is procreation.”); Lyon v. Barney, 132 Ill. App. 45, 50 (1907)(“[T]he procreating of the human species is regarded, at least theoretically, as the primary purpose of marriage ...”); Grover v. Zook, 87 P.638, 639 (Wash. 1906)(“One of the most important functions of wedlock is the procreation of children.”); Adams v. Howerton, 486 F. Supp. 1119, 1124 (C.D. Cal. 1980), aff’d 673 F.2d 1036 (9th Cir. 1982)(observing that a “state has a compelling interest in encouraging and fostering procreation of the race”);
A New Jersey court waxed lyrical on this point:“Lord Penzance has observed that the procreation of children is one of the ends of marriage. I do not hesitate to say that it is the most important object of matrimony, for without it the human race itself would perish from the earth.” Turney v. Avery, 113 A. 710, 710 (N.J. Ch. 1921)
Some evidence on the anthropological point:“Although the details of getting married – who chooses the mates, what are the ceremonies and exchanges, how old are the parties – vary from group to group, the principle of marriage is everywhere embodied in practice.... The unique trait of what is commonly called marriage is social recognition and approval ... of a couple’s engaging in sexual intercourse and bearing and rearing offspring.” Kingsley Davis (ed.), Contemporary Marriage: Comparative Perspectives on a Changing Institution (New York: Russell Sage Foundation)(1985).
Kinda blows their entire argument right off the platform.

I'll bet they ignore the facts and continue parroting their lame, empty rhetoric...

“Game Over”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#8409 Aug 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
I'm advocating granting political asylum to Russian gays harmed by Putin's anti-free speech laws. Let American gays see what real bigotry looks like and they won't be so quick to demean the word by using it to label all the left's political opponents. Keeping marriage one man and one woman is care and respect for everyone while we cherish the laws that keep civilization working. Wait a few generations before leaping to radical new social formulas.
blah, blah, blah

gfy

:-)
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#8410 Aug 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
No "group of people" were excluded to begin with. Both men and women have always been included in the recognition of marriage, it's their union which forms the definitional foundation of marriage. To remove one sex from that definition, would be to redefine marriage.
.
<quoted text>
There is also a church that performs plural marriage ceremonies too...are they being denied the right to marry couples too?
<quoted text>
What specifically am I wrong about?
since i don't have time for specifics....everything you post, literally.

good luck though.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8411 Aug 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Let American gays see what real bigotry looks like
We already know what it looks like. It's exemplified every time you make a post.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#8412 Aug 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
I'm advocating granting political asylum to Russian gays harmed by Putin's anti-free speech laws. Let American gays see what real bigotry looks like and they won't be so quick to demean the word by using it to label all the left's political opponents. Keeping marriage one man and one woman is care and respect for everyone while we cherish the laws that keep civilization working. Wait a few generations before leaping to radical new social formulas.
It is OK to be gay in Russia. Pride Parades and same sex marriage are out of the question. Seems like your kinda place pal.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#8413 Aug 19, 2013
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
How anyone uses their body, provided it is consensual and not causing harm, is normal.
Proof that homosexuality is a mental illness.
BTW, homosexual activity does cause harm.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/index....

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8414 Aug 19, 2013
GrouchoMarxist wrote:
<quoted text>
Kinda blows their entire argument right off the platform.
I'll bet they ignore the facts and continue parroting their lame, empty rhetoric...
Exactly.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#8415 Aug 19, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
It is OK to be gay in Russia. Pride Parades and same sex marriage are out of the question. Seems like your kinda place pal.
Not my kind of place, I advocate for free speech and freedom of association; not redefining marriage law for everyone without their consent.

Putin's Russia is homophobic and bigoted toward gays. I favor granting asylum in the USA so American gays will learn not to defame people who disagree on one issue but hold more fundamental values about life and human dignity.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#8416 Aug 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>I'm advocating for equal rights and I've given evidence homosexuals have always married under the same laws as everyone else. I'm advocating against the special right to sue your neighbor or state to have an activist judiciary rewrite marriage law instead of applying that law impartially to all.
Special right? Are you stupid or what? It's called DUE PROCESS, you moron, and it is guaranteed for EVERY CITIZEN of the USA under our Constitution. If you had two brain cells to rub together, you would have learned that in high school.

If you don't like the way the USA is governed, then you need to leave.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#8417 Aug 19, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Proof that homosexuality is a mental illness.
BTW, homosexual activity does cause harm.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/index....
Evidently, all major medical organizations disagree with you. Besides that, you have no credentials and zero education.

Whine on, loser... go hoarse with your 10 year whine.
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#8418 Aug 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
In a way yes....
Oh really? Gee I missed the part where heterosexual men and women aren't allowed to marry any more.... When did THAT law pass?
Rose Feratu

Hoboken, NJ

#8419 Aug 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
In a way yes....otherwise why are those advocating legal marriage be redefined, and trying to rationalize that by arguing procreation and marriage aren't linked, or that the state has no interest in marriage as potentially procreative union of one man and one woman.
Um.... when did the State say it had no interest in marriage of procreative unions?

You are allowing your emotions to cloud your judgment.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8420 Aug 19, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Proof that homosexuality is a mental illness.
BTW, homosexual activity does cause harm.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/index....
Dear, you missed the part of my post where I stated "and not causing harm". Having unprotected sex with someone infected with HIV can cause harm. Gay, straight, bi or other.

Thanks for demonstrating yet again what a complete moron you are!

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#8421 Aug 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
In a way yes....otherwise why are those advocating legal marriage be redefined, and trying to rationalize that by arguing procreation and marriage aren't linked, or that the state has no interest in marriage as potentially procreative union of one man and one woman.
And the children with same-sex parents was one of the reasons why the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that same-sex couples must be allowed civil marriage rights, Goodridge (2003). The state does have an interest in seeing that the parents of children have the best chance of success in the raising of those children — and that is done through civil marriage.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8422 Aug 19, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>You got that right, as a Christian, I am very sorry to read comments from a disgusting person as this. Please don't think all Christians are like this.
I don't, and never have. I typically try and separate "Christians" from "fundamentalists", and this one takes the cake for the latter!.
I will say I've been loving your posts today!!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8423 Aug 19, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>Not my kind of place, I advocate for free speech and freedom of association; not redefining marriage law for everyone without their consent.
Ahhh, there it is, the cowards favorite lie.

Once again Brian, please explain to the room what marriage law was redefined for everyone. What law are you referring to?

Watch as he cowardly avoids responding!!
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
Putin's Russia is homophobic and bigoted toward gays.
So are 37 states in this country.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>
I favor granting asylum in the USA so American gays will learn not to defame people who disagree on one issue but hold more fundamental values about life and human dignity.
inequality is not a fundamental value. Denying rights is not dignified. Disagreeing with you does not defame you.

You remain an idiot.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#8424 Aug 19, 2013
Rose Feratu wrote:
<quoted text>
Evidently, all major medical organizations disagree with you.
Just the gay ones.

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 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 3 min Frankie Rizzo 15,008
News Justicea s gay marriage order halts licenses in... (Jan '16) 11 min cpeter1313 480
News The Men Kissing to Fight Anti-Gay HateBy Samant... 18 min Bruce 10
News Austin Loses 'A Safe Space for Gay Men to Go Ha... 30 min Frankie Rizzo 4
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 48 min Frankie Rizzo 38,650
News Excited by Trump, gay Republicans struggle with... 1 hr Shirvell s Shrivel 215
News Star Trek Discovery needs to push boundaries wi... 1 hr Shirvell s Shrivel 14
More from around the web