When did I ever claim it affected me personally? You're falling into the old cliche canards that don't interest me.
You're not the most riveting writer yourself,Bronson.
And if it doesn't effect you,why are you even making a concern about it?
I fully admit I have two solid and logical reason why I am pro SSM.
My daughter is gay.
And I am in the wedding business (and it's a very lucrative industry)
I'm dong it for love of my daughter and the opportunity to make lots of cash.
What's your stake in sticking your nose into other peoples business other that gratifying your own ego?
You gone beyond just stating an opinion,you yourself are tryoing to convince others to adopt your beliefs.
Nothing wrong with that.
But ultimately,you're on the losing side.
Homosexuals are demanding special rights to change institutions and definitions of words that have existed since the beginning of human history.
Actually,all they are asking to do is be allowed to get married.
No one is going to force you to marry a guy.
So was Patrick Henry's "Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death".
Sometimes,being radical and extreme isn't such a bad thing.
You sure as hell haven't proven that SSM is going to be a bad thing.
There is no reason why gays can't create their own institutions of civil unions and have their own exclusive institutions, but that isn't good enough for them.
It wasn't good enough for Mildred and Richard Loving,and I and my wife are glad it wasn't good enough for them.
Since you yourself have stated that it doesn't effect you,why should you care?
Why do you insist on sticking your nose into other peoples business?
That's a very nasty habit you have there.
Sticking of noses into things that don't concern may have caused more deaths and injuries than cigarette have.
And for far longer
They want to change existing institutions that have specific social and economic purposes for their own selfish gain while at the same time excluding other groups that would want to join this same club based upon their sexual behavior too.
Still demonizing people,I see.
Sounds like you are talking about some secret society bent on world domination.
Sort of a Gay Illuminati.
Didn't people really no different from you used to say very similar things about "them thar uppity niggers" and "those thar evil Jews"?
Explain what these "selfish gains"are?
I gain financially from gay weddings.
What's wrong with that?
And just who are these "other groups" you speak of.
The wouldn't be the child diddlers,sheep*****s,and out and out wingnuts,are they.
Do I need to lump you in the group you into the bigot group again?
In the end, all these different combinations of people based upon sexual behavior that fall outside of institution of marriage are just make believe pretend marriages.
You really don't know a lot of gay people,do you Bronson?
How may gay couples do you really know for a long time.
How may of them are within you intimate inner circle of friends?
Homosexuality is not just based on sex alone.
There is a love aspect to it also.
Two of my dearest and oldest friends,Ethan and Phillip have been "married" to one another for damn near 30 years,29 of they before they got legally married this year.
Other than it being two guys,there's nothing really different what they go through together than what me and Selena,and countless other married coupes go through.
There's nothing "pretend" about their relationship.They've had their good times,there bad times,they've raised a good son (from Phill's first marriage).
They are good people,and I see no reason why shouldn't be allowed to get that "paper".
What they have isn't a crime.
And if you keep insisting on lumping gay people with child molesters,sheep******,and other assorted wackjobs,I'm going to keep lumping you in with the rest of the bigots.
.
No it doesn't. This is a message board where political discussion takes place.
And a whole lot of prostelytizing,fearmongering,misinformation distribution,egostrokng,and just sticking noses into other peoples business,especially when it does't effect them.
Sort of like what you've been doing quite awhile
If the majority of the country supports it then let's vote on it state by state. That's not what is happening here though. CA (the most liberal state in the union) voted AGAINST gay marriage
Now that all the dirty,slimy tactics that lots of religious people used to sway the public of CA when they voted against it has come out in the open,I'm quite interested on how they would vote today.
and that wasn't good enough for radical militant homosexuals. They are using the courts to go around the will of the people.
Then change the legal system.Don't hate the players,hate the game.
Good luck with that.It'll be easier just to let the gays get married.
I have no problem with each state voting for what kind of "marriage' they want because that was intent of the Founders.Social experiments be left to the states.
Wasn't Jim Crow a "social experiment"?
That was left to the States.
Just saying.
Historically speaking,how have gays been treat by the States?
Or by the people within those States?
The Feds should stay out of it. That isn't what's happening now though.
I agree the Feds should say out of it,
We had a chance to change that.Instead,we chose Romney.
The radical left abuses the courts to mainstream their agenda against the will of the people.
The same things have been said during the Civil Rights Act of !964 by it's opponents.
Employing the same language as bigots from a bygone era really isn't helping your case.
Marriage has always meant man + woman.
Really, appealing to tradition?
Why not appeal to religion while you are at it?
I've noticed you still haven't explained why traditions shouldn't be allowed to change.
"Procreation" means man+woman.That hasn't changed.
"Marriage",on the other hand, is what you and the other person make of it.
Every married person knows that.
Straight or Gay.
Words and institutions have meaning and purpose.
And neither of them stay the same forever.
If you want to call ketchup mustard by all means, go for it. You're just pretending ketchup is mustard however. Ketchup is still ketchup.
Why should you care so much then to devote so much energy and timein this thread.No one is forcing you to call ketchup "mustard".
Marriage is not a condiment.
It is a process. Marriage is still a marriage.Whether it's straight or hetero.
There's a whole lot more baggage that comes with a marriage than just a dictionary definition.
There is no need to change the institution of marriage to appease the feelings of homosexuals. It just trivializes the institution.
And the 50% percent divorce rates among hetero marriages doesn't?
By the way Bronson,speak for your own damn self.
Gays getting married to one another may trivialize you institution of marriage,but it sure as hell doesn't trivialize the marriage between Selena and me.
If you open the door for teh gays, other groups who want to "marry" based upon sexual behavior or whatever combination they can think of will want to as well like the woman marrying a roller coaster.
Once again,the spooooooky language. Trying to envoke an emotional response (in this case it "fear"on) on those who read your post,aren't you?
You're doing the same thing you blast others for doing.
I believe that is called "hypocrisy".
Gay Marriage isn't real marriage
It never will be
That's your opinion,and you are welcome too it.
Because I sure as hell don't want it.
My opinion is that gay marriages are real,and I've witnessed it numerous times
And more and more people everyday are agreeing with my opinion.
"Married" couples have ALWAYS been easy to spot.
Through out the ages,one can basically tell which couples are married.
Gay people have been married to one another for as long as there have been humans.
What they didn't have was a piece of paper.