Maryland voters' support for same-sex...

Maryland voters' support for same-sex marriage slips

There are 156 comments on the Ft. Meade Leader story from Nov 1, 2012, titled Maryland voters' support for same-sex marriage slips. In it, Ft. Meade Leader reports that:

Maryland, which just a month ago appeared poised to become the first state in the country to back gay marriage by popular vote, is now reported to be deadlocked on the issue, in part because of a drop in support from religious blacks.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Ft. Meade Leader.

First Prev
of 8
Next Last

“TODAY SCOTUS RULED MARRIAGE”

Since: Aug 08

IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT FOR ALL

#1 Nov 1, 2012
If Church Ministers, Pastors or any other Church representative want's to push this issue the way they are......Maybe just maybe their tax-exempt status should be removed!!!

I mean they should really look at what they're doing by injecting their religious views into the polling booth!!!

Vote Yes on Question 6!!!

“I'm out hunting”

Since: Jan 10

For your mind and soul

#2 Nov 1, 2012
Throughout it's history, the church has played the role of bully

Since: Oct 12

Coolidge, AZ

#3 Nov 1, 2012
Blacks are the most homophobic and racist segment of our American society.
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#4 Nov 1, 2012
Kind of reminds me of the church's "each after its own kind" argument to justify separate but equal. How soon they forget.

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#5 Nov 1, 2012
Not a bit true, YOU are.
Your one of the most self hating homosexuals I've ever seen. And your racism is palpable.
Actually, you hate so many things your probably one of the most hate filled posters on Topix. You make some of the other Trolls look like Saints.

[QUOTE ]who="Cal In AZ"]Blacks are the most homophobic and racist segment of our American society.[/QUOTE]
ramone bodulasie

United States

#6 Nov 1, 2012
Does the church or the public have that right to reject certain behavior

.of course they do if it afects them or thier children.

Let talk about the health risks of the gay lifestyle to themselves and the public in general.

Acording to the cdc and ama only shooting heroin in your ARM is slightly more dangerous.

Let talk about having to wair a plug in your rectum in order to keep from soiling your self

Let's talk about stds aids hiv parasites drug alcohol and mental problems

Forget the deflection about the church its about health and safety issues

I have read the reports and they are frightening its a very dangerous way to live and the public needs to be made aware of it
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#7 Nov 1, 2012
ramone bodulasie wrote:
Does the church or the public have that right to reject certain behavior
.of course they do if it afects them or thier children.
Let talk about the health risks of the gay lifestyle to themselves and the public in general.
Acording to the cdc and ama only shooting heroin in your ARM is slightly more dangerous.
Let talk about having to wair a plug in your rectum in order to keep from soiling your self
Let's talk about stds aids hiv parasites drug alcohol and mental problems
Forget the deflection about the church its about health and safety issues
I have read the reports and they are frightening its a very dangerous way to live and the public needs to be made aware of it
...yawn...

You make up the silliest lies to justify your prejudice.

“TODAY SCOTUS RULED MARRIAGE”

Since: Aug 08

IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT FOR ALL

#8 Nov 1, 2012
ramone bodulasie wrote:
Does the church or the public have that right to reject certain behavior
.of course they do if it afects them or thier children.
Let talk about the health risks of the gay lifestyle to themselves and the public in general.
Acording to the cdc and ama only shooting heroin in your ARM is slightly more dangerous.
Let talk about having to wair a plug in your rectum in order to keep from soiling your self
Let's talk about stds aids hiv parasites drug alcohol and mental problems
Forget the deflection about the church its about health and safety issues
I have read the reports and they are frightening its a very dangerous way to live and the public needs to be made aware of it
Your health and safety argument is moot because we don't prevent heterosexuals who participate in high risk sexual behavior from getting married, we don't prevent heterosexuals who are HIV/AIDS positive from getting married, we don't prevent heterosexuals who have STD's from getting married.....and therefore, we can't make exceptions based solely on one's sexual orientation or who there having intimate relations with!!!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#9 Nov 1, 2012
Maryland allows churches to be polling places, and early voting goes on right after services.
nomad

United States

#10 Nov 1, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
...yawn...
You make up the silliest lies to justify your prejudice.
I wasn't aware that the cdc and ama were given to reporting lies

The word predudice means to prejudge I read the reports before making up my mindl

So your statement make you the liar

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#11 Nov 1, 2012
ramone bodulasie wrote:
Does the church or the public have that right to reject certain behavior
.of course they do if it afects them or thier children.
Let talk about the health risks of the gay lifestyle to themselves and the public in general.
Acording to the cdc and ama only shooting heroin in your ARM is slightly more dangerous.
Let talk about having to wair a plug in your rectum in order to keep from soiling your self
Let's talk about stds aids hiv parasites drug alcohol and mental problems
Forget the deflection about the church its about health and safety issues
I have read the reports and they are frightening its a very dangerous way to live and the public needs to be made aware of it
The very important factoid omitted from your source reports is that the numbers are drawn from County and free clinics.

Hardly representative of the larger gay population.

“TODAY SCOTUS RULED MARRIAGE”

Since: Aug 08

IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT FOR ALL

#12 Nov 1, 2012
nomad wrote:
<quoted text>
I wasn't aware that the cdc and ama were given to reporting lies
The word predudice means to prejudge I read the reports before making up my mindl
So your statement make you the liar
Again, the CDC gives ESTIMATES, not facts......and until we prevent heterosexuals from marrying who engage in high risk sexual behavior, who are HIV/AIDS positive, have herpes, genital warts or other STD's or who engage in anal sex......we can not apply these standards to Gays and Lesbians just because you don't like it!!!
nomad

United States

#13 Nov 2, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
Your health and safety argument is moot because we don't prevent heterosexuals who participate in high risk sexual behavior from getting married, we don't prevent heterosexuals who are HIV/AIDS positive from getting married, we don't prevent heterosexuals who have STD's from getting married.....and therefore, we can't make exceptions based solely on one's sexual orientation or who there having intimate relations with!!!
So your logic is becouse we don't stop one kind one dangerous behavior we should dubble down and compound the problem buy permitting more dangerous
Behavior. I'm interested how do those that issue marrage
Licenses know if a hetrosexual cupple is hiv positive do they wair signs hand out cards becouse frisco doesn't make you blood test they don't even make you wair cloths

Oh snap did I just set your straw man on fire

My favorite gay logic is an adult male that sticks his penis

Into an under age boys rectum isn't gay.

Tell me how old were you when you were first molested
nomad

United States

#14 Nov 2, 2012
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
The very important factoid omitted from your source reports is that the numbers are drawn from County and free clinics.
Hardly representative of the larger gay population.
So your saying the numbers could be even bigger wow its worse then I thought and these are just what reported many would seek to keep it privite sounds like they are rotting away with disease how sad.

“TODAY SCOTUS RULED MARRIAGE”

Since: Aug 08

IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT FOR ALL

#15 Nov 2, 2012
nomad wrote:
<quoted text>
So your logic is becouse we don't stop one kind one dangerous behavior we should dubble down and compound the problem buy permitting more dangerous
Behavior. I'm interested how do those that issue marrage
Licenses know if a hetrosexual cupple is hiv positive do they wair signs hand out cards becouse frisco doesn't make you blood test they don't even make you wair cloths
Oh snap did I just set your straw man on fire
My favorite gay logic is an adult male that sticks his penis
Into an under age boys rectum isn't gay.
Tell me how old were you when you were first molested
There are lots of Gays and Lesbians who have NEVER been molested and who are still Gay or Lesbian because it is who they are.....one's sexual orientation is innate, it's not a choice unless one is bisexual!!!!

There are heterosexual women who were molested as young girls, yet they are not Lesbians.......so, why is your theory that if a person is Gay or Lesbian that must mean they had to be molested?

How would the County clerk know if 2 Gay men applying for a marriage license are HIV/AIDS positive? They wouldn't and it doesn't matter.....and you again are making an ASSumption that ALL Gay men have HIV/AIDS and they don't!!!

As for your idiotic comment about a man doing an underage boy in a sexual manner.....well, that's simply Child Molestation and it's labeled male-male molestation because it rarely has anything to do with the sexual orientation of the Molester!!!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#16 Nov 2, 2012
NorCal Native wrote:
If Church Ministers, Pastors or any other Church representative want's to push this issue the way they are......Maybe just maybe their tax-exempt status should be removed!!!
I mean they should really look at what they're doing by injecting their religious views into the polling booth!!! Vote Yes on Question 6!!!
If same sex marriage becomes law, those same Church Ministers, Pastors or any other Church representative would be treated as extremists. Keeping marriage as is, between male and female, is the moderate position; changing the law to allow two men or two women to be considered married is the extreme position.

Vote no on six, to keep the status quo.

“TODAY SCOTUS RULED MARRIAGE”

Since: Aug 08

IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT FOR ALL

#17 Nov 2, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>If same sex marriage becomes law, those same Church Ministers, Pastors or any other Church representative would be treated as extremists. Keeping marriage as is, between male and female, is the moderate position; changing the law to allow two men or two women to be considered married is the extreme position.
Vote no on six, to keep the status quo.
How so? They will still be allowed to preach whatever they want and not face any legal action as long as it doesn't incite a riot or harm others!!!

Brain, WHAT PART DON'T YOU GET THAT MARRIAGE IS HAPPENING BETWEEN SAME-SEX COUPLES? It's NOT an extreme position.....it's called being inclusive, just like it was inclusive when interracial couples started getting married!!!

Marriage has been evolving for over the last 500 years......and there's nothing wrong with 2 adult men or 2 adult women getting married!!

Remember to vote and Vote Yes on Question 6:-)

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#18 Nov 2, 2012
If same sex marriage becomes law, your church group, that advocates marriage as husband/wife, will be treated the same way the KKK is treated. If same sex marriage becomes law, your church membership would be as suspect as wearing a white sheet.

Keeping marriage as is, between one man and one woman, is the moderate view. Changing the definition of marriage or criminalizing same sex marriage are the extreme positions. If you're a conservative, keep the definition of marriage as is.

If you vote no on six, same sex couples will still be able to go to New York for a same sex marriage. You won't limit the rights of anyone, you'll just limit entitlements for same sex dependent beneficiaries and stop intrusive new government regulation of marriage.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#19 Nov 2, 2012
nomad wrote:
<quoted text>
So your logic is becouse we don't stop one kind one dangerous behavior we should dubble down and compound the problem buy permitting more dangerous
Behavior. I'm interested how do those that issue marrage
Licenses know if a hetrosexual cupple is hiv positive do they wair signs hand out cards becouse frisco doesn't make you blood test they don't even make you wair cloths
Oh snap did I just set your straw man on fire
My favorite gay logic is an adult male that sticks his penis
Into an under age boys rectum isn't gay.
Tell me how old were you when you were first molested
You are right, we should ban heterosexual sex.

Almost all undiagnosed cases of STDs, especially HIV/AIDS, is in the heterosexual portion of the population, and we are talking strict heterosexuals who never "experimented." The blood contamination epidemics of the past were all from heterosexual blood, and the contamination has always been wide spread not localized. Simply by being straight, based on your logic, you are posing a more serious risk to us asexuals, that means you are the more serious threat and we should outlaw your behavior. Making it illegal to breed will also slow population growth in the country, which is another benefit and addresses another serious threat.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#20 Nov 2, 2012
Brian_G wrote:
If same sex marriage becomes law, your church group, that advocates marriage as husband/wife, will be treated the same way the KKK is treated. If same sex marriage becomes law, your church membership would be as suspect as wearing a white sheet.
Keeping marriage as is, between one man and one woman, is the moderate view. Changing the definition of marriage or criminalizing same sex marriage are the extreme positions. If you're a conservative, keep the definition of marriage as is.
If you vote no on six, same sex couples will still be able to go to New York for a same sex marriage. You won't limit the rights of anyone, you'll just limit entitlements for same sex dependent beneficiaries and stop intrusive new government regulation of marriage.
Oh what an original strawman you have constructed here.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

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.

Maryland Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Decisions and debates taking place on Maryland ... Jun 29 reality is a crutch 1
News Next 25 Articles May 31 L I G E R 1
News Latest numbers: Hogan mobilizes state resources May '15 Sam 1
News Hogan focuses on unfinished business Apr '15 Gary 1
News Fact check: O'Malley lays claim to an ambitious... Apr '15 Brian 1
News Maryland legislature revamps public information... Apr '15 Marian 1
News Uber bill passes Maryland Senate, heads to House Apr '15 joe glazer 2
More from around the web