Dems don't embrace gay marriage decision

AP | 11/18/03 | NEDRA PICKLER

[Reactionary]

"(AP) — The major Democratic presidential candidates continued to back legal rights for gays but declined to go as far as the Massachusetts Supreme Court and endorse gay marriage."

Sure they do.

They support it, but they're hardly stupid enough to vocalize their support.

What? Are liberals lying again?

[knak]

Where does Shillary stand on this?

[BunnySlippers]

Dean and his cohorts have already taken a sharp left turn. Why stop now?

[T Lady]

"What? Are Liberals lying again?"

...Does a bear have fur?

-Regards, T.

[Radix]

This stupid Orwellian maneuver by the Liberals, is going to seriously kick them in the ass, when the backlash comes.

Always look on the bright side.

[anniegetyourgun]

So true....elected lib/dems are well down the path to destroying traditional marriage.

[anniegetyourgun]

Squeeze here.

[Batrachian]

Gay divorce - a new growth industry for lawyers.

[kattracks]

I think they have many constituents who were expecting the Dim's support on this. This will have repercussions.

[knak]

Thank you very much. I figured as much! I must say, I'm glad she stands there. Against the rational thinking Americans that will vote against her for that.

[Recovering_Democrat]

BULL****!

They DO embrace this decison: LIBERALS-DEMOCRATS-SOCIALISTS...whatever you want to call them most certainly DO embrace this decison.

Look at the beginning of the Iowa "debate" hosted by Hitlery this weekend:
opened with the National Anthem by the Des Moines Gay Men's Choir.
Look at who APPOINTS these liberal judges that rules for gay marriage: LIBERALS-DEMOCRATS-SOCIALISTS.
Look at the Presidential candidates for the LIBERALS-DEMOCRATS-SOCIALISTS...many of them went groveling to the militant gay community celebrating their desire for marriage.

Right now these RATS may be saying, "oh no..." but if this is allowed to go through, THEY WILL TAKE FULL CREDIT FOR IT.

Democrats are such freakin' LIARS. They cannot even be honest about who they are!!

Is there ANY wonder I'm a
Recovering_Democrat?

[Donna Lee Nardo]

"Where does Shillary stand on this?"

I can answer that! Anything popular during the time of Noah leading up to the flood; anything practised in the cities of Sodom and Gomorra (sp?) before the the reign of fire; and all activities during the Roman reigns of Caligula, Nero and a few others, are all a-okay with shrillery.

[Map Kernow]

Of course the Democrats don't embrace "gay" marriage! Heaven forbid! *WINK!* *WINK!*

[Political Junkie Too]

Just like with the war vote, the Democrat presidential candidates are against it until they win the election, then they'll change their minds. With the war vote, they tried to postpone it until after the election, then when shamed into voting beforehand, they voted for it but are now recanting.

-PJ

[Paleo Conservative]

Only underdog candidates Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley Braun support laws that would allow same-sex couples to wed.

So does Dennis intend to make his boyfriend the "first lady"?

[OldPossum]

..Does a bear have fur?

LOL. That's the G-rated version!

[Terabitten]

Gay divorce - a new growth industry for lawyers.

I'm going to get flamed for this, I know, but I think conservatives are taking this issue completely wrong. Let me begin by saying that I am terminally heterosexual man, a former infantry officer, and the father of a wonderful little girl.

We should fight against "civil unions." We should argue that we have a mechanism in place for two people who want to share their lives, yadda yadda yadda. It's called marriage. Let gays get married! Then sit back and watch the fun as the gay divorce and alimony suits begin.

My real issue is that "civil unions" blur the line of what marriage is. If two men can declare themselves in "civil union," that is, some state in between singleness and marriage, what will stop a heterosexual couple from declaring the same thing? What happens if there are children involved? Family law, flawed though it may be, is designed to provide the best possible life (through child support and visitation) for the child under the worst possible circumstances (divorce). If I can simply declare myself to be in civil union with my girlfriend (assuming I had one lol), and get all the legal benefits of being married, with NONE of the difficulties if the relationship fails, why on earth would I ever bother to actually get married?

As a Christian, I believe homosexual relationships are an abomination to the Father. What difference does it make if they choose to be "married?" Their actions are still sinful, and somehow declaring that we can't do anything about their homosexuality, but we can do something about their legal status just seems silly to me.

Flame away lol...

[Enterprise]

"Gay divorce - a new growth industry for lawyers."

Dewey Dickum & Howe, the preferred law firm for gays seeking a divorce.

[Poohbah]

Dems don't embrace gay marriage decision

Translation: "As if we needed this right now."