Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61392 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gay marriage. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering two controversial cases involving whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry: Proposition 8, California's 2008 ban on gay marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which since 1996 has defined marriage for federal purposes as a union between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

“"Not all who wander are lost."”

Since: Mar 10

[email protected]

#4366 Jun 27, 2013
hello wrote:
Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed because they got so wicked,and one of the the things was man wanting to lie with man.the bible makes it clear,there is many areas it speaks on this,but it must be really bad in GOD'S eyes cause in lev. it says if a man lies with another man they should be put to death.
AND, also in Leviticus 12:16 "And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him." More fun lurks in Deuteronomy 22:13-21 "If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her ... and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: And the damsel's father shall say ... these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die." Harsh, huh? Oh, let's not forget the punitive measures required for not observing the sabbath in Numbers 15:32-56 "They found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.... And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones.... And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses." Kinda makes ya think twice about patronizing The Home Depot on Sunday afternoon, doesn't it? Or does it?

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#4367 Jun 27, 2013
hello wrote:
Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed because they got so wicked,and one of the the things was man wanting to lie with man.the bible makes it clear,there is many areas it speaks on this,but it must be really bad in GOD'S eyes cause in lev. it says if a man lies with another man they should be put to death.
Funny, Jesus seemed to think it was a lack of hospitality.

Regardless of the interpretation, the Bible has no bearing on matters of civil law in this country.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#4368 Jun 27, 2013
lides wrote:
Funny, Jesus seemed to think it was a lack of hospitality.
Regardless of the interpretation, the Bible has no bearing on matters of civil law in this country.
You should know by now that there are just some Christians that don't let Jesus stand in the way of their Christianity.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#4369 Jun 27, 2013
lides wrote:
There is not the possibility to carry on a rational debate is an utter imbecile, which you are.
Wow, that statement is unintelligible and you call others imbeciles. BWAHAHAHAHA! JD, you'll never change.

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#4370 Jun 27, 2013
fr Ravianna:

>Homosexuality spits on the purpose of marriage so gay marriage does not exist.<

Um, my MARRIAGE LICENSE says something different. My wife and I celebrate our fifth wedding anniversary tomorrow. Sorry, it's just for the two of us.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4371 Jun 27, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, you are an irrational moron, and I am done conversing with you.
If you still think that comparing marriage to those who are single is an equality issue, then you are not right in the head. Period. End of story.
There is not the possibility to carry on a rational debate is an utter imbecile, which you are.
Absolutely, it's an equality issue. And YOU are a MORON! YOU MORON!

Now go bugger off and perform some "favors" for your party. Just don't do it here.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4372 Jun 27, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>No dear, my counterargument is that you really can't even fake having a clue as to what you are babbling about. You made it clear that you really weren't paying attention to what you claimed to have learned when you repeatedly misidentified the basic concept. Anything you say after "the continuity of biological strategy" isn't worth bothering with. By the way, it isn't name calling, it's the truth. You really are an idiot.
Hey IDIOT! Do you have a clue about having a clue? I'm sure you do, but you obviously still don't have a counterargument.

....because you're an IDIOT!

...and I'm certainly not your dear. Go hump a post if you need something to hold dear!
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4373 Jun 27, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny, Jesus seemed to think it was a lack of hospitality.
Regardless of the interpretation, the Bible has no bearing on matters of civil law in this country.
Unless it suits you or your party's agenda.

I'm still waiting on Obama to put an end to those "faith based initiatives" that he condemned Bush for! Any time now!

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#4374 Jun 27, 2013
anonymous wrote:
Hey IDIOT! Do you have a clue about having a clue? I'm sure you do, but you obviously still don't have a counterargument.
Sweetie, you aren't paying attention, my counterargument is that you aren't able to fake having a clue, you can't even fake knowing the basics of the continuity strategy. It's still not the continuity of biological strategy.

PS You are who I want to call you dear. Don't like it? Not my problem.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#4375 Jun 27, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Awww. Name calling again?
Well, don't worry too much. We've got big boy soldiers who will defend your "right" to call people names.
Remember! USE IT! You WILL USE IT!
no, I wasn't name calling at all, i was just pointing out that you were ranting oncoherently...

would you like to re-read the post you put up and we can see if it was incoherent rambling?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#4376 Jun 27, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Go ahead and be the conservatives buddy! I think that irony is the best expected result of the current situation.
I already said that I have no intention of fixing those who have committed themselves to criminal lifestyles, as defined by our two political parties. It's got to get much worse before it gets better. Then again, it might not get better!
I really don't want to live to see this country put in its place but if they aren't going to move in the right direction, I really don't care how much they slow down in their eventual failure.
You really don't have any idea as to what binds my morality but I guarantee you that it has nothing to do with what 300 million Elvis fans think! With that in mind, go back to your posing. See what it gets you when the bullets start flying. Don't worry about what pose I'm striking.
Incoherent rambling...
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4377 Jun 28, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Sweetie, you aren't paying attention, my counterargument is that you aren't able to fake having a clue, you can't even fake knowing the basics of the continuity strategy. It's still not the continuity of biological strategy.
PS You are who I want to call you dear. Don't like it? Not my problem.
It's understood then! You use the term "sweetie" not as a term of affection, but as a term of condescension.

I put forth that your entire sexual lifestyle is of a similar nature. Smile for the camera! Homosexuality is a choice, and for most people, it's a political choice.

It's unconstitutional to give tax breaks to gay married people or any other married people if unmarried people don't have the same options. I want the option to engage in a Civil Union that has all the rights of marriage, and I also want to have the right to do so with several people. I don't want any vigilante judge penalizing me if I choose to break the contract because of my sexual practices.

That's all there is to it. So please don't carry on with your name calling. You don't have an argument or a counter argument. Certainly not one you're willing to put on the table. Too bad. You must not feel too intellectually capable of defending it.

That's the real problem, isn't it?
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4378 Jun 28, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Incoherent rambling...
Glad you were capable of fixing your first blunder. I get tired of decoding people's incoherent rambling.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#4379 Jun 28, 2013
anonymous wrote:
I put forth that your entire sexual lifestyle is of a similar nature. Smile for the camera! Homosexuality is a choice, and for most people, it's a political choice.
Can you find a single study, school, medical organization, or scientific organization that supports this assertion?

I didn't think so.

Merely repeating an assertion ad nauseum does not make it true.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#4380 Jun 28, 2013
anonymous wrote:
It's understood then! You use the term "sweetie" not as a term of affection, but as a term of condescension.
Wrong again dear, I use such terms to be polite, particularly with folk who make it difficult to be.
anonymous wrote:
I put forth that your entire sexual lifestyle is of a similar nature. Smile for the camera! Homosexuality is a choice, and for most people, it's a political choice.
Sorry dear, ignorance such as that you have displayed here is a choice, homosexuality is a gift we've been given. The ONLY choice we have is in how we live with the gift we were given to grow up with.
anonymous wrote:
It's unconstitutional to give tax breaks to gay married people or any other married people if unmarried people don't have the same options.
According to whom dear? You don't impress me much as a constitutional scholar, so who do you have to back you up on that claim. Unmarried folk do have the option to marry, as long as the person they are choosing to marry is legally eligible to do so.
anonymous wrote:
I want the option to engage in a Civil Union that has all the rights of marriage, and I also want to have the right to do so with several people. I don't want any vigilante judge penalizing me if I choose to break the contract because of my sexual practices.
Sweetie, the reason the law limits you to one legal spouse at a time is because any attempt to place a limit beyond that would be arbitrary and unenforceable and because the more that enter into such a legally recognized relationship, the more diluted your rights, benefits and protections would become. The legal purpose of marriage is to establish ONE person as your next of kin, not a committee.
anonymous wrote:
That's all there is to it. So please don't carry on with your name calling. You don't have an argument or a counter argument. Certainly not one you're willing to put on the table. Too bad. You must not feel too intellectually capable of defending it.
That's the real problem, isn't it?
Now that you have switched to an argument that you can discuss in a semi-intelligent manner, rather than one where you couldn't even get the basic concept you were trying to convey right, there is more to argue.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#4381 Jun 28, 2013
lides wrote:
a) You have not proven it was stolen.
b) You seem to lack the ability to understand that the form 990 Schedule B in question is public information.
c) You can only prove the HRC produced the FEC filing, which similarly is public information.
d) You are merely reinforcing the notion that you aren't to terribly bright.
Don't worry, NOM won't exist much longer, their mission shall become moot with future decisions, and their funding will dry up as acceptance sets in. Their fight against the rights of fellow citizens is abhorrent, and they and their donor should be ashamed of themselves.
They deny the crime and want to destroy NOM, not just steal their tax records.

We are dealing with people of questionable judgement.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#4382 Jun 28, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
They deny the crime and want to destroy NOM, not just steal their tax records.
We are dealing with people of questionable judgement.
You've yet to prove a crime, and NOM is nefariously bootstrapping with a claim they, similarly cannot prove.

Face it Brian, the FEC filing was released first, and NOM is a political group, meaning that their Form 990 Schedule B is public.

You lose.

“=”

Since: Oct 07

Appleton WI

#4383 Jun 28, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>my mistake...triple dose of meds tonight.
FYI...you are ranting incoherently. shut your computer down before you make a bigger ass of yourself...
This person seems truly bitter and disgruntled about everyone and everything. I hope he doesn't have any weapons and is planning a trip to a school, church, mall, or theater anytime soon. Anti-gay bigots are a dime a dozen, but this is a more unique form of batshit crazy.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4384 Jun 28, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you find a single study, school, medical organization, or scientific organization that supports this assertion?
I didn't think so.
Merely repeating an assertion ad nauseum does not make it true.
Do I find a single anyone who is willing to condemn the witch hunts in the name of defeating terrorism? Nope! Same goes for abortion, affirmative action or homosexuality. These are strange times and I don't make my politics known by my name either.

Bad, bad times ahead of us, but I know what it means to be caught napping when the music stops. You don't feel the tension that is mounting. You don't have a clue as to what's about to occur. Nobody really does, but you're the kind of obsessive-compulsive that's guaranteed to be sticking your head into one of the cannons when they start firing.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#4385 Jun 28, 2013
Tre H wrote:
<quoted text>
This person seems truly bitter and disgruntled about everyone and everything. I hope he doesn't have any weapons and is planning a trip to a school, church, mall, or theater anytime soon. Anti-gay bigots are a dime a dozen, but this is a more unique form of batshit crazy.
Yes, I'm disgruntled about everyone and everything. Deal with it.

Don't worry about me. I won't worry about those Bradley Mannings out there. Let's see who is protecting civil rights and who just wants to hurt the system and the people. Me? Well, when the system breaks, I'll be glad to hurt those who had a chance to make it work and chose selfishness instead. Judgement belongs to those who prevail.

....but you .....will worry!.....You MUST have an edge!

You WILL USE IT!

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min John Galt 1,535,901
News James Comey fired as FBI director 4 min mom 2,769
News ICE arrests nearly 200 illegal immigrants in Ca... 5 min Retribution 8
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 6 min RiccardoFire 2,607
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 7 min bad bob 270,237
News Hillary Clinton to address Wellesley College gr... 12 min GOFIGURE 19
News Barack Obama charms golfing crowds during round... 13 min Retribution 7
News White House rebuts Washington Post report of Tr... 16 min Vlad 865
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 27 min Dr Guru 240,953
More from around the web