Obama Announces Full Support for Gay ...

Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage

There are 26163 comments on the politix.topix.com story from May 9, 2012, titled Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage. In it, politix.topix.com reports that:

It's a historic day for gay rights activists: Obama has just announced his support for gay marriage.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at politix.topix.com.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#26068 Jan 20, 2013
Droppin in for a tad wrote:
<quoted text>
There is a way around the legal tangle that came to me a few years ago ... declare all marriages to be corporations. The problem is that the children would be the "assets" AND "liabilities" of the corporation. lol
Whoa. First corporations are "persons", and now marriages would be corporations... that would make marriages "persons" under the law. Imagine what the Supreme Court would do with that. Citizens United would be a molehill.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#26069 Jan 20, 2013
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
No you don't. You even said so, right here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/gay/TQATTKSB8...
"When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing."
You don't support equality.
You're an anti-gay troll pretending to put forward an argument about polygamy and incest because you are unable to make a rational case against civil marriage for same-sex couples.
You're full of it.
How does that make me a bigot dummy? Please explain.

This should be good!

OK, you caught me Kojak! I'm a fundie spy! Secretly against same sex marriage! I'm lying to try and trick you! Too funny!

You're paranoid jerky. Not good.
Frankie Rizzo

Hayward, CA

#26070 Jan 20, 2013
When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing.

There has to be a limit. Where is that limit that is fair and equal?

Only idiots like the paranoid jerk "Jerald" think that question is "anti gay".

If you do not feel threatened by that question like he does, let's discuss it.

I think same sex, poly and incest should be allowed. What do you think?

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#26071 Jan 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing.
There has to be a limit. Where is that limit that is fair and equal?
Only idiots like the paranoid jerk "Jerald" think that question is "anti gay".
If you do not feel threatened by that question like he does, let's discuss it.
I think same sex, poly and incest should be allowed. What do you think?
I think you're full of sh1t.

“Just Call It Marriage Now”

Since: Sep 08

All rights For All!

#26072 Jan 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
"Implicate"?
Limit the "affect"!
Speak English dummy! I
Let me Help you out.
Google Dictionary wrote:
<quoted text>im·pli·cate
Verb
Show (someone) to be involved in a crime: "police implicated him in more killings".
Bear some of the responsibility for (an action or process, esp. a criminal or harmful one): "he is heavily implicated in the bombing".
Synonyms
involve - entangle - embroil - imply
This would be a more personal example...
"Frankie has been implicated in several vile posts with others"
Google Dictionary wrote:
<quoted text>affect
Verb
Have an effect on; make a difference to: "the dampness began to affect my health".
Pretend to have or feel (something): "as usual I affected a supreme unconcern".
Noun
Emotion or desire, esp. as influencing behavior or action.
Synonyms
verb. touch - influence - pretend
noun. emotion - affection
A more personal example...
No one is affected because you stomp your feet, flail your arms about and scream obscenities.

Bright Blessings,
And Happy Searching for Your Soul,
Mrs Whitewater

“Just Call It Marriage Now”

Since: Sep 08

All rights For All!

#26073 Jan 20, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing.
There has to be a limit. Where is that limit that is fair and equal?
Only idiots like the paranoid jerk "Jerald" think that question is "anti gay".
If you do not feel threatened by that question like he does, let's discuss it.
I think same sex, poly and incest should be allowed. What do you think?
How typical. Instead of staying your course and proving your argument, you turn to another and ask the same question again hoping for different results.

Jerald check mated you and your ego simply can't take the blow, so you lower yourself to calling Jerald and others names, while flailing yourself all about.

How old must one be before they realize that the tantrums they threw as children will have the same "affect" on them now as they did then: ignored. The only difference is when you have tantrums as an adult, you will not only be ignored, but people will talk about you and say, "Bless his soul"


Bright Blessings,
Mrs Whitewater

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#26074 Jan 21, 2013
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
The rational basis for civil marriage for same-sex couples is the exact same basis for opposite-sex couples, since legally opposite-sex couples do not have to be willing or able to produce children.
Nor do opposite sex couples have to.....only sex between men and women is potentially procreative. Proponents of SSM are arguing from the standpoint that same sex personal intimate emotional sexual relationships are in fact marriages, even though there is still significant disagreement nation wide on this point, and seek to graft them onto the existing legal, cultural, historical, and/or religious understanding, and structure, of marriage as a union of husband and wife, including the body of laws that address that sexual union.

Marriage serves society by linking men, women, and their children together. Any deviations from this only serve to increase the instability of that function.

“Alley Cat Blues”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#26075 Jan 21, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing.
There has to be a limit. Where is that limit that is fair and equal?
Only idiots like the paranoid jerk "Jerald" think that question is "anti gay".
If you do not feel threatened by that question like he does, let's discuss it.
I think same sex, poly and incest should be allowed. What do you think?
I think you talk out of both sides of your mouth. You apparently want marriage to mean nothing.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#26076 Jan 21, 2013
Jupiter wrote:
<quoted text>I think you talk out of both sides of your mouth. You apparently want marriage to mean nothing.
Why not change the meaning at all? A conjugal union of husband and wife, incorporates both sexes, links the products of that union, children, to their mother and father. What compelling reason is there to change that now? None.

Let's maintain the big picture here
Jane Dodo

West New York, NJ

#26077 Jan 21, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
<quoted text>
Still don't get it eh? It's a simple concept really. If everyone is married, marriage won't mean anything. It will be silly to ask are you married when the answer is always yes. Starting to get it?
I think you understand it but are playing dumb because you have no intelligent response. I'm just waiting for your dopey ad hominem! Please try and make it funny!
Gee..... ask everyone if they are alive. The answer is always yes. I guess being alive means nothing, eh?

Insert your favorite "dopey" ad hominem here:_________
Now multiply it by infinity. The result is your stupidity score.
Jane Dodo

West New York, NJ

#26078 Jan 21, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not change the meaning at all? A conjugal union of husband and wife, incorporates both sexes, links the products of that union, children, to their mother and father. What compelling reason is there to change that now? None.
None? Well shit.... I guess that settles it. Run to the Courthouse and tell them YOU decided.

“Alley Cat Blues”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#26079 Jan 21, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not change the meaning at all? A conjugal union of husband and wife, incorporates both sexes, links the products of that union, children, to their mother and father. What compelling reason is there to change that now? None.
Let's maintain the big picture here
The compelling reason is that consenting adults of a different sexual orientation than yours do not have the right to form a legally regocnized committed union. You have that right; they don't, which constitutes unequal rights.
Jane Dodo

West New York, NJ

#26080 Jan 21, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Marriage serves society by linking men, women, and their children together. Any deviations from this only serve to increase the instability of that function.
Would you care to demonstrate with FACTS just how SSM increases instability in straight marriage???? I'm sure NOM would be interested in your research.
Jane Dodo

West New York, NJ

#26081 Jan 21, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing.
Repeating that silliness often doesn't make it any less silly. Everything=nothing? Oh wait.... you're the same person that thinks 3=2.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#26082 Jan 21, 2013
Jupiter wrote:
<quoted text>
The compelling reason is that consenting adults of a different sexual orientation than yours do not have the right to form a legally regocnized committed union. You have that right; they don't, which constitutes unequal rights.
I see.....and within that rational statement lies an answer. A legally recognized committed union for SSCs should be an option. There's no reason it can't be. Instead of trying to be just like husband and wife, why not focus on same sex spouses for life and the uniqueness of both male and female same sex unions. Both sides win

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#26083 Jan 21, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you care to demonstrate with FACTS just how SSM increases instability in straight marriage???? I'm sure NOM would be interested in your research.
"Straight marriage"? Madone! Its not straight marriage Mc Fly.... its either same sex or opposite sex. Josh Weed a self described gay Mormon man is married to a woman and they have children together. Is that a "straight" marriage? If a bisexual woman marries a man, is that a "straight" marriage?
Jane Dodo

West New York, NJ

#26084 Jan 21, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
"Straight marriage"? Madone! Its not straight marriage Mc Fly.... its either same sex or opposite sex. Josh Weed a self described gay Mormon man is married to a woman and they have children together. Is that a "straight" marriage? If a bisexual woman marries a man, is that a "straight" marriage?
You wrote:
"Marriage serves society by linking men, women, and their children together. Any deviations from this only serve to increase the instability of that function."

OK... have it your way:
Would you care to demonstrate with FACTS just how SSM increases instability in opposite sex marriage????
Quest

Culpeper, VA

#26085 Jan 21, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
......
Exactly! It matters not the sexual orientation of the husband and wife in the joining together and the potential to create new life.
....
But the positional (or desire) to create new life is certainly NOT a requirement for legal marriage today. If it were, you would be able to make an argument that only a "man and woman" be able to marry.
You can't be suggesting creating a slew of new laws that place that requirement on only certain married couples, are you? It would have to placed on ALL married couples.
Don't you think that straight married couples (or potential married couples) would fight that just as firmly as any gay person would?
Quest

Culpeper, VA

#26086 Jan 21, 2013
Frankie Rizzo wrote:
When marriage means everything, it will mean nothing.
.....
Illogical, of course, since no one has ever suggested it mean "everything".

Quest

Culpeper, VA

#26087 Jan 21, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
...... There's no reason it can't be. Instead of trying to be just like husband and wife, why not focus on same sex spouses for life and the uniqueness of both male and female same sex unions. Both sides win
No gay couple is trying to be just like a "husband and wife". You seem a little confused. But don't worry. EACH gay person entering a marriage with another gay person of the same gender is absolutely unique, and brings their own strengths, weaknesses, and personality traits to the marriage. Their gender is not what makes them special and unique individuals.

But, the love is the same. The attraction is the same. The commitment is the same. The need for recognition is the same. The benefits and protections are the same. Their children benefit in the same way. Elderly gay married couples are more secure in the same way. Society benefits from their strong family in the same way.

Yep, it's a marriage all right!

For ALL the same reasons, save one. And that has never and WILL never be a legal requirement for any marriage.

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 LGBT kids should be very nervous about Betsy De... 34 min Core Feminist No ... 1
News Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 1 hr guest 496
News 'Gay cake' appeal decided 2 hr Bubba Cooder 26
Gay oovoo (Dec '12) 3 hr Ryan Blue eyed boy 25
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 3 hr Frankie Rizzo 69,504
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 3 hr TRUMP WINNERS 1,857
News Walmart agrees to $7.5 million settlement in di... 5 hr Rainbow Kid 1
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 7 hr Respect71 42,770
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 8 hr lides 22,323
More from around the web