Obama Announces Full Support for Gay ...

Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage

There are 26169 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.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13937 Jul 20, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Another red herring.
Not interested.
DISMISSED
NEXT
Run away, run away!!!

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#13938 Jul 20, 2012
Reality wrote:
<quoted text>I am attempting to follow your train of thought. I fail to understand how and why polygamy pertains to same sex marriage. I have not read nor heard of a gay man or woman requesting to marry multiple people of the same sex. If you are questioning why polygamy is against the law in the US, or you are asking for the right to marry multiple people, seek legal counsel. I can only speak of why I think its illegal and that would be fair and equitable property disbursement upon a divorce.
Thanks for the civil response. They are linked in the sense they both are alternative marriage forms practiced in this country, albeit with limited legal recognition for ssm. The advent of legal ssm has raised the "should polygamy be legal" question. Arguments made in favor of ssm, can be made for polygamy as well, provided it is between consenting adults. Polygamy has entered pop culture mainstream via cable TV's "Big Love" and "Sister Wives".

Put aside the legal aspects for the moment, and look at it from a philosphical perspective. Why do we accept, marriage- father/give birth to children-divorce, repeat, step families, blended families, SSC head families, etc., yet "draw the line" at consentual polygamy?

Or to ask it another way

If a man and his two wives, and their children moved into the neighbor hood, should the be rejected simply based on their family structure?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#13939 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not 'defining' sex...it's a biological given.....
You defined it wrong.

i had lots of sex in high school with girls , but none of it could have possibly produced a pregnancy.

perhaps you are confusing sex with heterosexual intercourse?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13940 Jul 20, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
I'm actually a very good actor; I could get in there if I wanted to,a nd then see how long they keep me. Could get a nice discrimination suit over it. Hmmm..that could be fun!
<quoted text>
Sue him for what??? He didn't say he doesn't hire gay people....
Reality

Madison, WI

#13941 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Red herring huh??? You mean like 'slavery' and 'women's rights' are 'red herrings' for you all???
Not at all. If you wish to discuss slavery or women's rights start a thread and lets go for it. If you wish to discuss Jesus or Buddha start a thread and we can. If you wish to discuss same sex marriage, this is one of many threads, do try and stay on topic.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#13942 Jul 20, 2012
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the civil response. They are linked in the sense they both are alternative marriage forms practiced in this country, albeit with limited legal recognition for ssm. The advent of legal ssm has raised the "should polygamy be legal" question. Arguments made in favor of ssm, can be made for polygamy as well, provided it is between consenting adults. Polygamy has entered pop culture mainstream via cable TV's "Big Love" and "Sister Wives".
Put aside the legal aspects for the moment, and look at it from a philosphical perspective. Why do we accept, marriage- father/give birth to children-divorce, repeat, step families, blended families, SSC head families, etc., yet "draw the line" at consentual polygamy?
Or to ask it another way
If a man and his two wives, and their children moved into the neighbor hood, should the be rejected simply based on their family structure?
Pholisophically? As already stated, we have matured beyond that inherently misogynistic social construct.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13943 Jul 20, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Lots of countries have been experiencing higher birhtrates outside of marriage and their kids are doing just fine. I think if you look at the real factors that harm these kids in the US, the lack of their parents owning a piece of paper from the state is not one of them at all.
You are really an idjuit! You think it's what people should be aiming for to have kids out of wedlock??? What do you mean 'just fine???? That has absolutely 'no' meaning whatsoever. We know children born out of wedlock are more likely to drop out of school, be a burden on the tax system and or legal system, and are likely to continue the cycle of having children out of wedlock as well.....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13944 Jul 20, 2012
Reality wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all. If you wish to discuss slavery or women's rights start a thread and lets go for it. If you wish to discuss Jesus or Buddha start a thread and we can. If you wish to discuss same sex marriage, this is one of many threads, do try and stay on topic.
Nope slavery and women's rights here are red herrings.....they have nothing to do with ssm....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13945 Jul 20, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>You defined it wrong.
i had lots of sex in high school with girls , but none of it could have possibly produced a pregnancy.
perhaps you are confusing sex with heterosexual intercourse?
Wow! What part of "I'm not defining sex", don't you get????

“Alley Cat Blues”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#13946 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not 'defining' sex...it's a biological given.....
Bingo. And it's a biological given that homosexuals have a sex drive that is aroused by people of the same sex. It is not a choice.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13947 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Run away, run away!!!
That's all you ever do with your silly comments and nutzpoid judgment icons.

Do you even have a life?


ROTFLMAOAY

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13948 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope slavery and women's rights here are red herrings.....they have nothing to do with ssm....
Ever heard of fundamental rights?

How about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Ever heard of those?

How about freedom?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13949 Jul 20, 2012
Jupiter wrote:
<quoted text>
Bingo. And it's a biological given that homosexuals have a sex drive that is aroused by people of the same sex. It is not a choice.
We are not talking about the 'sex drive'....keep up...

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#13950 Jul 20, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
That's all you ever do with your silly comments and nutzpoid judgment icons.
Do you even have a life?
ROTFLMAOAY
Of course I do....I live it every day....answer the question...(if you can)....
Reality

Madison, WI

#13951 Jul 20, 2012
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the civil response. They are linked in the sense they both are alternative marriage forms practiced in this country, albeit with limited legal recognition for ssm. The advent of legal ssm has raised the "should polygamy be legal" question. Arguments made in favor of ssm, can be made for polygamy as well, provided it is between consenting adults. Polygamy has entered pop culture mainstream via cable TV's "Big Love" and "Sister Wives".
Put aside the legal aspects for the moment, and look at it from a philosphical perspective. Why do we accept, marriage- father/give birth to children-divorce, repeat, step families, blended families, SSC head families, etc., yet "draw the line" at consentual polygamy?
Or to ask it another way
If a man and his two wives, and their children moved into the neighbor hood, should the be rejected simply based on their family structure?
If you are asking what I personally think on the subject of plural spouses, I will give you an answer.

I don't care one way or the other. If you some how feel the need to have 3 wives or husbands, it does not affect my life in a positive or negative light.
I find no reason that children raised in a family environment where there are multiple spouses should be treated any different than that of a two spouse household. That can also be said of children being raised is a same sex household. Children should never be held responsible for the actions and practices of their parents.

As I stated in a previous post, the only reason I can come up with is a fair and equatable disbursement of property in a polygamous relationship. Simply said would the first wife and her children have a claim that would supersede the claim of wives two, three and four and their children?

I do not agree how ever that polygamy and same sex marriage are some how intertwined. If that where true then you might just as well add in dogs, cats, sheep, rocks, trees and dead people.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13952 Jul 20, 2012
Questions: How do we know GTF was here?

Answer: GTF always leave a tiny flame, a lemon and a clueless icon on every post.

Conclusion: GTF needs to get a life.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13953 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course I do....I live it every day....answer the question...(if you can)....
I did.

You weren't paying attention. Nothing new about that is there.

Here, read my lips.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

14th amendment fundamental rights.

Freedom. Something you and your ilk despise with a passion.
Reality

Madison, WI

#13954 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope slavery and women's rights here are red herrings.....they have nothing to do with ssm....
Try to read a post before you give a rebuttal. I stated that already. If you wish to discuss them start a thread.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#13955 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
You are really an idjuit! You think it's what people should be aiming for to have kids out of wedlock??? What do you mean 'just fine???? That has absolutely 'no' meaning whatsoever. We know children born out of wedlock are more likely to drop out of school, be a burden on the tax system and or legal system, and are likely to continue the cycle of having children out of wedlock as well.....
But as pointed out, the out of wedlock part is not one of the factors of that. it is their socio-economic status that is the main driver of that.

More facts for you!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#13956 Jul 20, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow! What part of "I'm not defining sex", don't you get????
I'm getting the part where you did, indeed attempt to define it by sayings its main function was to procreate.

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 Judge rules against florist who didn't want to ... (Jan '15) 1 min lides 146
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 8 min lides 24,125
News Same-sex marriage fight turns to clerk who refu... 12 min lides 1,804
News Next gay marriage fight: religious exemptions (Oct '14) 17 min lides 6,358
News Boy Scouts of America ends ban on gay adults 18 min John Henry 57
News Ex-Navy SEAL alleges anti-gay bullying by CIA w... 21 min John Henry 6
News Feds release updated strategy against AIDS in A... 23 min Fa-Foxy 6
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 29 min Frankie Rizzo 8,171
News Gay wedding cake at center of Colorado Appeals ... 1 hr Reverend Alan 846
News Supreme Court extends gay marriage nationwide 1 hr Pietro Armando 1,215
More from around the web