• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

Navy Pride said:
A voice of reason enters the fray.

Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com
Click to expand...



He supports civil unions for homosexuals.That's just a paper coated or pc term for gay marriage. A civil union a relationship between a same-sex couple that is legally recognized by a state authority and has the rights and responsibilities of marriage. Any politician who supports civil unions and opposes gay marriage is a liar who is suckering traditional marriage supporters into accepting gay marriage. Unlike you I actually oppose homosexual marriage.I do not hide behinds to some politically correct term that was invented in order to not offend traditional marriage supporters while ushering in gay marriage. Changing the name of something doesn't make it different. If I call a t-bone steak a vegetarian meal it does not make it so.
 
Navy Pride said:
well if gay marriage is so popular why is it only legal in very liberal states and why when there is a vote of the people of the state gay marriage always loses big time? can you answer me that please?
Click to expand...

Big time? Really? Your definition of "losing a vote big time" is losing by less than 10% of a popular vote?
 
Navy Pride said:
its great to see activist are overruled so the people can speak.
Click to expand...

So now both the judicial system and the legislature is activist? What will you say when same sex marriage is finally approved by a popular vote, that the people are activist?

We live in representative governments. Forcing every state to have a popular vote on this one issue is insane and wrong. The only reason your side wants the popular vote is because you know that most people don't care enough about this to go out and vote on it unless they are really for it or really against it, which means if left up to the legislature or the judiciary, as it should be, then you guys lose.

I'm looking forward to the SCOTUS finally ruling that same sex marriage should be allowed in all states and that anything else is discrimination based on sex.
 
jamesrage said:
He supports civil unions for homosexuals.That's just a paper coated or pc term for gay marriage. A civil union a relationship between a same-sex couple that is legally recognized by a state authority and has the rights and responsibilities of marriage. Any politician who supports civil unions and opposes gay marriage is a liar who is suckering traditional marriage supporters into accepting gay marriage. Unlike you I actually oppose homosexual marriage.I do not hide behinds to some politically correct term that was invented in order to not offend traditional marriage supporters while ushering in gay marriage. Changing the name of something doesn't make it different. If I call a t-bone steak a vegetarian meal it does not make it so.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Moderates like Christie and Romney use the civil union as a way to appease to both sides. I don't think they should have anything to do with it. Two gays want to get married? Fine, they have to answer for it when judgement comes, not me.
 
jamesrage said:
He supports civil unions for homosexuals.That's just a paper coated or pc term for gay marriage. A civil union a relationship between a same-sex couple that is legally recognized by a state authority and has the rights and responsibilities of marriage. Any politician who supports civil unions and opposes gay marriage is a liar who is suckering traditional marriage supporters into accepting gay marriage. Unlike you I actually oppose homosexual marriage.I do not hide behinds to some politically correct term that was invented in order to not offend traditional marriage supporters while ushering in gay marriage. Changing the name of something doesn't make it different. If I call a t-bone steak a vegetarian meal it does not make it so.
Click to expand...

I don't agreee James, they can call it anything they want, just not marriage.
 
winston53660 said:
Because most people don't vote and really don't give a damn if gays get married. Yet every time gay marriage shows up on a ballot zealots against it show en mass. And that mass is less than 10% of the population.
Click to expand...


as long as your side loses and its not called marriage that is all I care about
 
roguenuke said:
Big time? Really? Your definition of "losing a vote big time" is losing by less than 10% of a popular vote?
Click to expand...

10% is huge and some states in the south it was over 20% ...Look it up
 
Navy Pride said:
Typical Liberal, lose their house and then ask the gov. to buy you a new one...:)
Click to expand...

What makes you really believe that DADT being repealed has gone that bad? What specific event is it that should have it put back in place? Please, enlighten us all.

Afterall, you are arguing this with people who actually know how the repeal has gone and know for a fact that it has been a complete non-issue. We had one person during the training mention berthing arrangements, and that was prior to the actual repeal. No one has mentioned it since except in joking. My husband is an MA, and there has been no issues come his way related to the repeal.
 
Navy Pride said:
10% is huge and some states in the south it was over 20% ...Look it up
Click to expand...

10% is not huge considering that is the high estimate for most states. Prop 8 passed by less than 4%. Hell, those against interracial marriage in 1968 were at 70%. This means that if interracial marriage were put to a popular vote then, it would have lost by more than 40% of the vote. At this particular time, all polls (except for those targeting conservatives or older people) have shown that people support same sex marriage at a level over 50%.
 
Navy Pride said:
as long as your side loses and its not called marriage that is all I care about
Click to expand...

In the end, it will be called marriage or all marriages will become "civil unions". Anything else is discrimination. And not calling it "marriage" is a huge waste of taxpayer money.
 
Hare said:
I'm a fan of Christie's on most issues, dissapointed to see him make this choice. If I had to guess, this move is nothing more than posturing as a "true social conservative" for a 2016 presidential run.
Click to expand...

:yt
.................
 
Navy Pride said:
I don't agreee James, they can call it anything they want, just not marriage.
Click to expand...

It is the primary function of government to dictate prohibited usage of words. That was a primary reason for the American revolution and is the heart of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
 
Ockham said:
I live in NJ, he really doesn't agree with gay marriage for real. It's not posturing....
Click to expand...

How well do you know him? Been to his house many times?
 
Navy Pride said:
With all due respect you know nothing about Washington.........Its politics especially in the western part of the states are one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Click to expand...

More to the point that in both cases these were instances where people duly elected by the people passed state laws regarding this issue. In one case, the people of the state elected both a legislature and a governor who would go along with it. In another case they elected a legislature that would go along but a governor who would veto it. In both cases these were instances of states acting upon states rights, and elected officials passing laws rather than it being determined by the court system.

I admit, I don't know much about Washington politics...neither do you know much about New Jersey Politics. But in a general sense, its an example of states functioning in the manner they should under our constitution.
 
Navy Pride said:
I don't agreee James, they can call it anything they want, just not marriage.
Click to expand...

So if I call cow **** a T-bone steak will you eat " T-bone steak" since your logic dictates that calling something by another name makes it different? These pro-gay marriage politicians masquerading as moderates are making suckers out traditional marriage supporters.
 
Last edited:
Discrimination against homosexuals, be it in the military, in marriage, or in any other walk of life, is disappearing. No matter how desperately some people fear the gay boogeyman, discrimination is contrary to the American spirit, and is unconstitutional. It doesn't matter what legislature does what, who votes for what, or who vetoes what. The constitution protects every single citizen from unjust discrimination.
 
roguenuke said:
What makes you really believe that DADT being repealed has gone that bad? What specific event is it that should have it put back in place? Please, enlighten us all. After-allll, you are arguing this with people who actually know how the repeal has gone and know for a fact that it has been a complete non-issue. We had one person during the training mention berthing arrangements, and that was prior to the actual repeal. No one has mentioned it since except in joking. My husband is an MA, and there has been no issues come his way related to the repeal.
Click to expand...

Your husband is not and MA at the Naval Hospital Bremerton...........I watched a vote on the HOR where re instatement of DADT was soundly approved by Republicans and blue dog dems. They can't get it through the senate at the moment but that will change in November.
 
Paschendale said:
Discrimination against homosexuals, be it in the military, in marriage, or in any other walk of life, is disappearing. No matter how desperately some people fear the gay boogeyman, discrimination is contrary to the American spirit, and is unconstitutional. It doesn't matter what legislature does what, who votes for what, or who vetoes what. The constitution protects every single citizen from unjust discrimination.
Click to expand...



Did you read any posts in this thread my left wing friend?
 
jamesrage said:
So if I call cow **** a T-bone steak will you eat " T-bone steak" since your logic dictates that calling something by another name makes it different? These pro-gay marriage politicians masquerading as moderates are making suckers out traditional marriage supporters.
Click to expand...


That is my opinion. sorry if you don't agree call it domestic partnerships or what ever, just not marriage.
 
Navy Pride said:
Your husband is not and MA at the Naval Hospital Bremerton...........I watched a vote on the HOR where re instatement of DADT was soundly approved by Republicans and blue dog dems. They can't get it through the senate at the moment but that will change in November.
Click to expand...

I'll remember to stop by there when I come up next month and ask them personally what they have seen since they apparently are the authority on problems despite not really having that big of a base they are responsible for.

He is an MA at San Diego, including Balboa Naval Hospital. I'm pretty sure he would have info on any official problems this area has related to the repeal. Certainly a lot more than some corpsman's opinion on how well the repeal is going.
 
roguenuke said:
I'll remember to stop by there when I come up next month and ask them personally what they have seen since they apparently are the authority on problems despite not really having that big of a base they are responsible for.

He is an MA at San Diego, including Balboa Naval Hospital. I'm pretty sure he would have info on any official problems this area has related to the repeal. Certainly a lot more than some corpsman's opinion on how well the repeal is going.
Click to expand...


All I can tell you is what they told me. Its PC on the record to say everything is fine but off the record its a different matter. we are getting way off topic though.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
All I can tell you is what they told me. Its PC on the record to say everything is fine. we are getting way off topic though.
Click to expand...

Sure.

So, back to the representative republic you live in not working for you there. Apparently you would much rather have a tyranny of the majority, which is not what our founding fathers wanted, which is why we are not a direct democracy.

Or maybe you only want direct democracy on those things you think the legislature gets wrong, despite the fact that polls have consistently shown that the majority wants same sex marriage to be legal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom