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.

Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#11082 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Now....that....was funny!
<quoted text>
Huh is actually a Commie.....who wishes he could take away people's right to put measures on the ballot and vote for them.
What makes you think you have a 'right' to put things on a ballot and vote for them?
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#11083 Oct 7, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Greater protection, BWAHAHAHA! You're a moron.
Three is greater than two. To argue against that FACT is to be ridiculous.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11084 Oct 7, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
OK MORON ONCE AGAIN.....YOU CANT VOTE AWAY RIGHT YOU CANT VOTE AWAY RIGHTS YOU CANT VOTE AWAY RIGHTS...
OK CHOOCH ONCE AGAIN......YOU CAN VOTE ON BALLOT PROPOSALS INCLUDING ONES THAT LEGALLY DEFINE MARRIAGE WITHIN A PARTICULAR STATE.
I know your Nazi training makes you want to BUT YOU CANT HITLER BOY.
I know your Commie training make it difficult for you to understand this, and makes you want to take that right away from the people....BUT YOU CAN'T COMRADE.
Can we put a vote out to ban all religion in one state???????
Put it on the ballot, you have the right, depending on the state, to petition to put proposals on the ballot.
Your saying if the people vote for it we could even make murder legal huh???
Has communism made you that stupid. Americans have the right to vote on issues they put on the ballot. If you don't like the issue, VOTE IT DOWN THEN....but don't take away the right of citizens to vote.

http://www.citizensincharge.org/learn/primer

Ballot Initiative Primer
What is a ballot measure?
Ballot measures, also referred to as ballot initiatives and referendums (I&R), provide citizens the opportunity to discuss and vote on policy issues at the local level and state level. Using this process, in 24 states citizens can bring an issue to a public vote by gathering a pre-determined number of signatures from registered voters.

Some common names for ballot measures include initiative and referendum (I&R), voter initiatives, propositions, citizen initiatives, or questions.
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#11085 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
NO ONE voted to take away your right to marry....they VOTED TO CONFIRM the understanding of marriage as a union of HUSBAND AND WIFE!!!!
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
What part DON'T YOU GET?????!!!!! People in some states have the right to put proposals on the ballot to BE VOTED ON!!!! If the vote had been in favor of SSM you wouldn't be screaming what you do.!!!!
How about if we vote on catholics' right to get married?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11086 Oct 7, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
WRONG!!!!!!
Prop 8 attempted to take from gay and lesbian couples the right to marry in California. And that is why it was overturned: It targeted an unpopular minority's rights.
Bear in mind Jeff had the vote gone the other way, you've would have said the system worked. It would not only had been a victory at the polls, but a "moral" victory as well. What scary here is the people of California, twice had their votes nullified. If it can happen with the issue of same sex marriage, it can happen with other issues too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Propo... (2000)

How about prop 22 that preceded that?

Prior to 1977, marriage was defined in Section 4100 of the California Civil Code. This stated that marriage is "a personal relation arising out of a civil contract, to which consent of the parties making that contract is necessary".[6] While related sections of the law made references to sex, a State Assembly committee that was debating adding sex-specific terms to this section in 1977 noted: "Under existing law it is not clear whether partners of the same sex can get married".[7] That year, the legislature amended the legal definition of marriage to remove any ambiguity. In 1992 the legal definition of marriage was moved from the Civil Code to Section 300 of the Family Code.
When Proposition 22 came before voters, marriage was defined in the Family Code as "a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary" [italics added].[8]
Even though the definition governing who may marry explicitly precluded contracting a same-sex marriage in California, a separate provision, Section 308, governed recognition of marriages contracted elsewhere. This stated that a "marriage contracted outside this state that would be valid by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the marriage was contracted is valid in this state".[9] Advocates of Proposition 22 described Section 308 as a "loophole", apparently forcing California to recognize a same-sex marriage validly contracted in some other state.[10]
To address this, Proposition 22 did not reword the existing provisions of the Family Code, but added to them the declaration that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California".[11] The official citation of Proposition 22, the "California Defense of Marriage Act", is almost the same as that of a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted by Congress in 1996. This federal law had a similar purpose, and was intended to prevent any state from being obligated to recognize a same-sex marriage contracted in another state.
Huh

Faribault, MN

#11087 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
OK CHOOCH ONCE AGAIN......YOU CAN VOTE ON BALLOT PROPOSALS INCLUDING ONES THAT LEGALLY DEFINE MARRIAGE WITHIN A PARTICULAR STATE.
<quoted text>
I know your Commie training make it difficult for you to understand this, and makes you want to take that right away from the people....BUT YOU CAN'T COMRADE.
<quoted text>
Put it on the ballot, you have the right, depending on the state, to petition to put proposals on the ballot.
<quoted text>
Has communism made you that stupid. Americans have the right to vote on issues they put on the ballot. If you don't like the issue, VOTE IT DOWN THEN....but don't take away the right of citizens to vote.
http://www.citizensincharge.org/learn/primer
Ballot Initiative Primer
What is a ballot measure?
Ballot measures, also referred to as ballot initiatives and referendums (I&R), provide citizens the opportunity to discuss and vote on policy issues at the local level and state level. Using this process, in 24 states citizens can bring an issue to a public vote by gathering a pre-determined number of signatures from registered voters.
Some common names for ballot measures include initiative and referendum (I&R), voter initiatives, propositions, citizen initiatives, or questions.
You need a course in CONSTITUTIONAL law. A BALLOT CAN NOT GO AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION......

Civil rights can not be voted on..You Nazi pigs don't get it do you.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11088 Oct 7, 2013
Neil An Blowme wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think you have a 'right' to put things on a ballot and vote for them?
Mrs. Blowme's little boy Neil needs a civics lesson. No problem, I'm here to help the ignorant.

http://www.citizensincharge.org/learn/primer

Ballot Initiative Primer
What is a ballot measure?
Ballot measures, also referred to as ballot initiatives and referendums (I&R), provide citizens the opportunity to discuss and vote on policy issues at the local level and state level. Using this process, in 24 states citizens can bring an issue to a public vote by gathering a pre-determined number of signatures from registered voters.

Some common names for ballot measures include initiative and referendum (I&R), voter initiatives, propositions, citizen initiatives, or questions.
Huh

Faribault, MN

#11089 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Mrs. Blowme's little boy Neil needs a civics lesson. No problem, I'm here to help the ignorant.
http://www.citizensincharge.org/learn/primer
Ballot Initiative Primer
What is a ballot measure?
Ballot measures, also referred to as ballot initiatives and referendums (I&R), provide citizens the opportunity to discuss and vote on policy issues at the local level and state level. Using this process, in 24 states citizens can bring an issue to a public vote by gathering a pre-determined number of signatures from registered voters.
Some common names for ballot measures include initiative and referendum (I&R), voter initiatives, propositions, citizen initiatives, or questions.
So if a ballot measure was put to the vote to ban all religion in your state and it passed you would be ok with that?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11090 Oct 7, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
You need a course in CONSTITUTIONAL law. A BALLOT CAN NOT GO AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION......
Civil rights can not be voted on..You Nazi pigs don't get it do you.
You need in course in civics. A CONSTITUTION CAN BE AMENDED, INCLUDING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.
The people of California voted to amend their constitution after their previous vote had been Cast aside. If the vote had gone the other way, would you still be screaming you can't vote on civil rights?

You COMMIES DON'T GET IT!!!!!!! PEOPLE CAN VOTE ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC POLICY AND HOW MARRIAGE IS DEFINED. If you don't like it, GO BACK TO NORTH KOREA!

YOU HAVE THE SAME CIVIL RIGHT TO MARRY LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. You just don't want to exercise it like everyone else.
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#11091 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Bear in mind Jeff had the vote gone the other way, you've would have said the system worked. It would not only had been a victory at the polls, but a "moral" victory as well. What scary here is the people of California, twice had their votes nullified. If it can happen with the issue of same sex marriage, it can happen with other issues too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Propo... (2000)
How about prop 22 that preceded that?
Prior to 1977, marriage was defined in Section 4100 of the California Civil Code. This stated that marriage is "a personal relation arising out of a civil contract, to which consent of the parties making that contract is necessary".[6] While related sections of the law made references to sex, a State Assembly committee that was debating adding sex-specific terms to this section in 1977 noted: "Under existing law it is not clear whether partners of the same sex can get married".[7] That year, the legislature amended the legal definition of marriage to remove any ambiguity. In 1992 the legal definition of marriage was moved from the Civil Code to Section 300 of the Family Code.
When Proposition 22 came before voters, marriage was defined in the Family Code as "a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary" [italics added].[8]
Even though the definition governing who may marry explicitly precluded contracting a same-sex marriage in California, a separate provision, Section 308, governed recognition of marriages contracted elsewhere. This stated that a "marriage contracted outside this state that would be valid by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the marriage was contracted is valid in this state".[9] Advocates of Proposition 22 described Section 308 as a "loophole", apparently forcing California to recognize a same-sex marriage validly contracted in some other state.[10]
To address this, Proposition 22 did not reword the existing provisions of the Family Code, but added to them the declaration that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California".[11] The official citation of Proposition 22, the "California Defense of Marriage Act", is almost the same as that of a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted by Congress in 1996. This federal law had a similar purpose, and was intended to prevent any state from being obligated to recognize a same-sex marriage contracted in another state.
Let's put catholics' right to marry up to a vote.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11092 Oct 7, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
So if a ballot measure was put to the vote to ban all religion in your state and it passed you would be ok with that?
Go for it. So how would you define "religion"? Would we need thought police to enforce the ban? You have the nerve to say you're not a COMMIE??!!!!! Only the Communists want to ban religion.
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#11093 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Mrs. Blowme's little boy Neil needs a civics lesson. No problem, I'm here to help the ignorant.
http://www.citizensincharge.org/learn/primer
Ballot Initiative Primer
What is a ballot measure?
Ballot measures, also referred to as ballot initiatives and referendums (I&R), provide citizens the opportunity to discuss and vote on policy issues at the local level and state level. Using this process, in 24 states citizens can bring an issue to a public vote by gathering a pre-determined number of signatures from registered voters.
Some common names for ballot measures include initiative and referendum (I&R), voter initiatives, propositions, citizen initiatives, or questions.
Not all States have voter initiatives, dumbass.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11094 Oct 7, 2013
Neil An Blowme wrote:
<quoted text>
How about if we vote on catholics' right to get married?
Go ahead....the Church would still marry couples. But why stop there....include Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Etc, too.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11095 Oct 7, 2013
Neil An Blowme wrote:
<quoted text>
How about if we vote on catholics' right to get married?
Oh wait....don't forget the Mormons....after all the vote affected them too....at least the fundamentalist off shoots.
Huh

Faribault, MN

#11096 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
You need in course in civics. A CONSTITUTION CAN BE AMENDED, INCLUDING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.
The people of California voted to amend their constitution after their previous vote had been Cast aside. If the vote had gone the other way, would you still be screaming you can't vote on civil rights?
You COMMIES DON'T GET IT!!!!!!! PEOPLE CAN VOTE ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC POLICY AND HOW MARRIAGE IS DEFINED. If you don't like it, GO BACK TO NORTH KOREA!
YOU HAVE THE SAME CIVIL RIGHT TO MARRY LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. You just don't want to exercise it like everyone else.
YOU STILL CANT TAKE AWAY BASIC RIGHTS..

So can we vote away religious freedom???
Huh

Faribault, MN

#11097 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Go for it. So how would you define "religion"? Would we need thought police to enforce the ban? You have the nerve to say you're not a COMMIE??!!!!! Only the Communists want to ban religion.
I don't want religion banned. Just asking can we vote away religious freedoms?? YES OR NO.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11098 Oct 7, 2013
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you get it that NOT all want to marry someone of the opposite-sex and seeing as marriage is such a major decision in one's life.....
I get it, but one does not the state to marry, nor is one obligated to marry.
.THEY alone should be able to decide WHAT person they want to marry or who wants to marry them
REGARDLESS of specific gender restrictions!!!
No one says they can't!!! They can marry two people if they want, their first cousin, sister,brother....whatever. If you want to legally marry according to the state, you have to do so according to the state.
Oh and by the way.......we won 3 states at the ballot box in November of 2012.......and 1 state decided NOT to add specific gender restrictions to their State Constitution!!!
See...they system works. Has anyone screamed YOU CAN'T VOTE ON CIVIL RIGHTS? Probably not, no need to....right? Now suppose some group found a technically and found a judge to over turn the vote, I doubt, you't be too happy...particularly if it happened twice!
I have a wife......NOT a husband.........don't like it.....TO DAMN BAD....it's legal and it has both state and federal recognition.......and it will be recognized in all 50 states....for now, we are happy to have it be recognized in both OUR state and OUR federal government!!!
Yaaaaaaaay......pass the vino. Salud!

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#11099 Oct 7, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
You need in course in civics. A CONSTITUTION CAN BE AMENDED, INCLUDING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.
The people of California voted to amend their constitution after their previous vote had been Cast aside. If the vote had gone the other way, would you still be screaming you can't vote on civil rights?
You COMMIES DON'T GET IT!!!!!!! PEOPLE CAN VOTE ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC POLICY AND HOW MARRIAGE IS DEFINED. If you don't like it, GO BACK TO NORTH KOREA!
YOU HAVE THE SAME CIVIL RIGHT TO MARRY LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. You just don't want to exercise it like everyone else.
And just because a state votes to amend their constitution doesn't mean that that vote and amendment cannot be overturned by the Supreme Court. See Romer v. Evans (1996). So to think SCOTUS cannot strike down any state's 1 man, 1 woman marriage amendment would be foolish on your part.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11100 Oct 7, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU STILL CANT TAKE AWAY BASIC RIGHTS..
So can we vote away religious freedom???
You moron the basic, or fundamental right to marry, IS BASED ON THE MALE FEMALE RELATIONSHIP!!!! As for the religious freedom...RELIGION IS SPECIFICALLY PROTECTED IN THE CONSTITUTION....Marriage isn't mentioned. Oh Madone! Between you, and Mrs. Blowme's little boy Neil, there's some serious issues.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#11101 Oct 7, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't want religion banned. Just asking can we vote away religious freedoms?? YES OR NO.
Ohhhhhhh.....trying to downplay your COMMIE views. Now you don't want religion banned......just take away religious freedom. Oh this sounds interesting....do tell.

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 CEO's bonus cut 25% for his anti-gay, sexist ti... 2 min Hudson712 3
News Senate hopeful Roy Moore: gay sex is the 'same ... 54 min Ms Sassy 4
News Michigan sued after gay couples are rejected fo... 2 hr bohart 32
News Former Australian prime minister says he was he... 2 hr Pat Robertson s F... 1
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 3 hr cpeter1313 9,905
News Gay bar opens near Macon Road, drawing visitors... 4 hr General Zod 662
News Gay teen against same-sex marriage heckled at u... 5 hr EdmondWA 24
News Arizona Supreme Court says gays get equal paren... 5 hr Robert 26
News Judge rejects couple's argument for refusing ga... 5 hr EdmondWA 63
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 6 hr River Tam 56,047
More from around the web