Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61402 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.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8476 Oct 31, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
On the same page of your post is a reference to a government official who exercised a criminal behavior in her role.
Kind of ironic, isn't it.
You know you are not really married.
Smirk.
My marriage license says otherwise, as does 14 states and the federal government.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8477 Oct 31, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoa.... What happened to all the "harm"? But it tefreshing to see you realize its nice to share the marriage equality.
If the SCOTUS rules, I can't do anything about it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8478 Oct 31, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain how a child is "of" a same sex couple?
<quoted text>
Please explain, in relation to those other situations I mentioned, how consensual polygamy and incest "harm women & children & society"?
Simple, a child being raised by a same-sex couple, regardless of biological relationship.

See my numerous previous posts on the proven harm polygamy & incest causes women & children & society.

If you object, tell it to the court.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8479 Oct 31, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
I see.....so you have no ethical issue with any method?
So how were u created.....sperm mix, store bought egg and rented womb?
How 2 people create their children is their business.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8480 Oct 31, 2013
KiMare wrote:
LOL, the state is incapable of violating reality or reason???
I posted a GOVERNMENT study that clearly states that traditional nuclear families provide better outcomes than any default family situation. The government contradicts it's OWN study!
Congratulations, you have proven once again that you are so terribly bright.
Snicker.
Where does it say that?
You assert that it says as much, but the reality remains that you simply found a long study, that doesn't mention homosexual parents, and assert that it says as much becuase you assume, like you, that most people will simply accept your assertion and not read the study to find that it doesn't support your opinion.

Try again, scooter.

Even if the study did find that traditional families were the best environment for child rearing, that would not impact the reality that the state does not intervene to enforce such circumstances. The state allows divorce, it allows out of wedlock birth, it allows single adoption, and it allows single parenthood in general. Any one of which proves your assertion to be utterly irrelevant.

Congratulations, once again, you have proven that you fail to grasp basic concepts.
Brian_G wrote:
According to lides, "parents who teach their children to be responsible for the children they produce, and to marry before having children" are bigots:
<quoted text>
Brian, you are changing your argument after the fact again.

I said a parent who teaches their children that other people are lesser people entitled to lesser protection of the law are bigots. I don't think there is any great danger of too many gay people not taking care of the children they bring into the world.

You are a joke.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8481 Oct 31, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
How 2 people create their children is their business.
Awwwww.....you were created the old fashioned coital way! Ohhhhhh......no one told you....oops my bad.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8482 Oct 31, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Simple, a child being raised by a same-sex couple, regardless of biological relationship.
By that definition, a child could be "of" two siblings.
See my numerous previous posts on the proven harm polygamy & incest causes women & children & society.
If you object, tell it to the court.
Just give me the Reader's Digest version, incorporating those other situations, "reality shows featuring plural marriage families are allowed, serial monogamy, out of wedlock births, marriage-divorce-remarriage as many times as legally permissible, first cousin marriage".
1 post removed

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#8484 Oct 31, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you another one that believes that adopted children aren't real family members? Or that all blended families are fake?
I thought that was Wondering's particular delusion.
How, pray tell, did you come to that conclusion based on what I wrote?
Pietro Armando wrote:
But will the trend of unmarried pregnant gay men continue now that ssm is legal in some states?....

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#8485 Nov 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you another one that believes that adopted children aren't real family members? Or that all blended families are fake?
I thought that was Wondering's particular delusion.
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
But will the trend of unmarried pregnant gay men continue now that ssm is legal in some states?....

DNF replies: If anyone can find a pregnant gay man (married or un married) I suggest they notify the Nobel Prize committee! Such a discovery would surely result in several Nobel Prizes!
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#8486 Nov 1, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, well you'll just have to get over it.
Yeah! Yeah! Well....

I WILL get over it, but now is not the time for action on that level. Too many people are trying to ride out the status-quo as if it's not a train wreck in progress.

Right now, people are just starting to realize how far gone their government is, but even that won't move them. Poverty is the only thing that will. For now, they'd be happy to take a paycheck as a hired thug to repress their own. Some things just have to be unlearned and other things relearned.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8487 Nov 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
On the same page of your post is a reference to a government official who exercised a criminal behavior in her role.
Kind of ironic, isn't it.
You know you are not really married.
Smirk.
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
My marriage license says otherwise, as does 14 states and the federal government.
And I point out that the government clearly has a poor track record exercising it's role.

Even you know you are not really married.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#8488 Nov 1, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Where does it say that?
You assert that it says as much, but the reality remains that you simply found a long study, that doesn't mention homosexual parents, and assert that it says as much becuase you assume, like you, that most people will simply accept your assertion and not read the study to find that it doesn't support your opinion.
Try again, scooter.
Even if the study did find that traditional families were the best environment for child rearing, that would not impact the reality that the state does not intervene to enforce such circumstances. The state allows divorce, it allows out of wedlock birth, it allows single adoption, and it allows single parenthood in general. Any one of which proves your assertion to be utterly irrelevant.
Congratulations, once again, you have proven that you fail to grasp basic concepts.
<quoted text>
Brian, you are changing your argument after the fact again.
I said a parent who teaches their children that other people are lesser people entitled to lesser protection of the law are bigots. I don't think there is any great danger of too many gay people not taking care of the children they bring into the world.
You are a joke.
At the very start and in the conclusion.

Your excuse simply throws children under the bus. THAT is your argument?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#8489 Nov 1, 2013
IRS' Lois Lerner gave confidential Tea Party tax info to FEC, violating law
BY PAUL BEDARD | OCTOBER 31, 2013 AT 4:09 PM

The information, sent via email, to the FEC came in response to the organization’s questions about whether the IRS had granted tax-exempt status to the Tea Party groups. It is unclear how the information the IRS sent was going to help the FEC, since the IRS hadn’t determined the tax status of the groups yet.

The emails were produced to Judicial Watch last week by the FEC in response to an Aug. 9, 2013, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

The email chain began Feb. 3, 2009, when the FEC made it’s request to Lerner.

She emailed back 10 minutes later, and said:“I have sent your email out to some of my staff. Will get back to you as soon as I have heard from them.”

According to Judicial Watch, the materials “from the IRS’ files sent from Lerner to the FEC containing detailed, confidential information about the organizations. These include annual tax returns (Forms 990) and request for exempt recognition forms (Form 1024), Articles of Organization and other corporate documents, and correspondence between the nonprofit organizations and the IRS. Under Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, it is a felony for an IRS official to disclose either ‘return information or ‘taxpayer return information,’ even to another government agency.”

Lerner, who was head of the unit deciding tax exempt status, quit in the scandal.

“These extensive emails and other materials provide a disturbing window into the activities of two out-of-control federal agencies: the IRS and FEC,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.“And there is the very real question as to whether these documents evidence a crime.”...
http://washingtonexaminer.com/irs-lois-lerner...

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8490 Nov 1, 2013
KiMare wrote:
At the very start and in the conclusion.
Your excuse simply throws children under the bus. THAT is your argument?
It's no excuse, it is merely pointing out that your argument is irrelevant, and the actions of the state prove as much.

Grow up, and grow a relevant argument.

The reality remains that the state does not have an interest in children being raised in a traditional family.
anonymous

Absecon, NJ

#8491 Nov 1, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It's no excuse, it is merely pointing out that your argument is irrelevant, and the actions of the state prove as much.
Grow up, and grow a relevant argument.
The reality remains that the state does not have an interest in children being raised in a traditional family.
Yes...and even Hollywood is starting to see the rot that's coming out of Washington.

You're out to wag the dog, but it's an irresponsible gamble to leave our government in the hands of an "Ender's Game" culture of a secret society that is dependent on children to wage their wars for them.

Just a few points though.

1. The secret aristocracy will NEVER show their faces again. Public figures from the mainstream parties are complete puppets at this point in time. Your demonstrations and protests mean nothing to anyone. Their purpose is designed by others elsewhere.

2. Those who control the means of production, still control the world. In this case, the secret aristocracy is trapped. Their "means" exists outside our borders. In this country, we only have the idiot masses and they are interested only in a hole in which to fulfill their "needs".

There's an inherent instability here. SOMEone is likely to come along and take advantage of it. It's too bad that they are less likely to promise a chicken in every pot and more likely to promise nookie for the politically loyal!....but there it is!

Your vision is destined to fail. For now, you appeal to those who want to break things, but then there will be less nookie for them, and they won't stand for that! You're a disposable pawn that everyone in power has already written off.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#8492 Nov 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
IRS' Lois Lerner gave confidential Tea Party tax info to FEC, violating law
......
Yep, when you run out of new arguments, swing off topic.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#8493 Nov 1, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes...and even Hollywood is starting to see the rot that's coming out of Washington.
You're out to wag the dog, but it's an irresponsible gamble to leave our government in the hands of an "Ender's Game" culture of a secret society that is dependent on children to wage their wars for them.
Just a few points though.
1. The secret aristocracy will NEVER show their faces again. Public figures from the mainstream parties are complete puppets at this point in time. Your demonstrations and protests mean nothing to anyone. Their purpose is designed by others elsewhere.
2. Those who control the means of production, still control the world. In this case, the secret aristocracy is trapped. Their "means" exists outside our borders. In this country, we only have the idiot masses and they are interested only in a hole in which to fulfill their "needs".
There's an inherent instability here. SOMEone is likely to come along and take advantage of it. It's too bad that they are less likely to promise a chicken in every pot and more likely to promise nookie for the politically loyal!....but there it is!
Your vision is destined to fail. For now, you appeal to those who want to break things, but then there will be less nookie for them, and they won't stand for that! You're a disposable pawn that everyone in power has already written off.
How dumb do you want people to believe that you are?

My "demonstrations and protests mean nothing to anyone?" Sorry Charlie, but your assertion is being proven wrong in courts and elections across the country.

The reality remains that the US Constitution mandates that states provide all persons within their jurisdiction equal protection of the laws, and you have no valid argument why same sex couples should be denied equal protection of the law to marry.

This is why you advance paranoid and irrelevant theories like the post to which I am responding.
Mikey

Fullerton, CA

#8494 Nov 1, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes...and even Hollywood is starting to see the rot that's coming out of Washington.
You're out to wag the dog, but it's an irresponsible gamble to leave our government in the hands of an "Ender's Game" culture of a secret society that is dependent on children to wage their wars for them.
Just a few points though.
1. The secret aristocracy will NEVER show their faces again. Public figures from the mainstream parties are complete puppets at this point in time. Your demonstrations and protests mean nothing to anyone. Their purpose is designed by others elsewhere.
2. Those who control the means of production, still control the world. In this case, the secret aristocracy is trapped. Their "means" exists outside our borders. In this country, we only have the idiot masses and they are interested only in a hole in which to fulfill their "needs".
There's an inherent instability here. SOMEone is likely to come along and take advantage of it. It's too bad that they are less likely to promise a chicken in every pot and more likely to promise nookie for the politically loyal!....but there it is!
Your vision is destined to fail. For now, you appeal to those who want to break things, but then there will be less nookie for them, and they won't stand for that! You're a disposable pawn that everyone in power has already written off.
'The secret aristocracy'- Oh you mean 'The brotherhood'? maybe you should read a little more before conjuring up your 'conspiracies' theories.
Carl from Pittsfield

Pittsfield, MA

#8495 Nov 1, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
How dumb do you want people to believe that you are?
My "demonstrations and protests mean nothing to anyone?" Sorry Charlie, but your assertion is being proven wrong in courts and elections across the country.
The reality remains that the US Constitution mandates that states provide all persons within their jurisdiction equal protection of the laws, and you have no valid argument why same sex couples should be denied equal protection of the law to marry.
This is why you advance paranoid and irrelevant theories like the post to which I am responding.
Lides, can I please move to Georgetown to be with you. I love and need you.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8496 Nov 1, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
By that definition, a child could be "of" two siblings.
<quoted text>
Just give me the Reader's Digest version, incorporating those other situations, "reality shows featuring plural marriage families are allowed, serial monogamy, out of wedlock births, marriage-divorce-remarriage as many times as legally permissible, first cousin marriage".
Why should I do your work for you?

Go back and look it up if you're interested.

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 4 min Relaxen2 391,523
News The View that Putin's Advisor Has on Obama's Uk... (Nov '14) 4 min Add 6,125
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min USAsince1680 1,405,434
News Democratic National Convention Takeaways: Obama... 5 min Ralph from Michigan 21
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min Rogue Scholar 05 219,670
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 5 min Crow__ 233,430
News Donald Trump encourages Russia to hack Hillary ... 8 min Just Sayin 42
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... 12 min swampmudd 5,653
News The Latest: First lady calls out Trump, - hatefula 15 min Taletha 88 85
More from around the web