Posted on 08/08/2004 1:59:50 AM PDT by Dane
...In her eyes I saw an unmistakable sadness, as if she had been betrayed by the nation she had served so proudly.
I didn't want to believe banning gay marriage had such widespread support. But, Tuesday's vote in Missouri has given me pause.
With 70 percent agreeing to amend the Missouri Constitution to ban gay marriage, some believe the vote may be a bellwether for nine other states considering similar amendments this fall...
(Excerpt) Read more at heraldtribune.com ...
Homophobe, Americans are neanderthals, etc.etc., while kerry who voted against the Defense of Marriage act flip-flops once again, after the Missouri results are in.
Discrimination? The whiny lesbian in the article is a free to marry any man she wants like any other woman.
Well, except for close relatives, another sign of evil American bigotry I suppose.
I certainly don't see major software firms or similar businesses.
The liberals are starting to forget their own spin.
Not to worry, laws mean nothing to the Sodomites. California bans gay marriage but the Mayor of San Francisco has other plans and he has a wife that appear on CNN to advance the charge.
Gays thrive in upper class communites because as kids they hid in books and then hid in college where their lifestyle is encouraged. And then they go thru their 20s and 30s with no spouse to support and no kids. Whamo!!! They wind up 45 and rich.
Let us not kid ourselves, gay marriage is the largest wealth transfer to an already wealthy demographic group in the history of the U.S.
Rich Brooks hasn't even explained how half the Democrats in St. Louis County fell under the spell of right wing nut-jobs. LOL
I happen to not mind if gays marry, but I don't get this whole "betrayal" and "gays feel shut out" stuff.
Is this going to be an issue that, from now on, the revisionsists will use to further warp our interpretation of history? Will all presidents and historical figures who weren't for gay marriage now be considered evil the way George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are for owning slaves? (I personally think the way to look at that is that these men did this horrible thing because society hadn't eveolved to a certain point where the truth of the evil of slavery was so obvious; they were basically good men who did an evil thing.)
I guess now Ghandi, MLK, Reagan, FDR, and every person in history who wasn't for gay marriage is now completely evil and must be expunged from history texts because they didn't see that gay people should have the right to marry.
Since when are leftists so into "the state" sanctioning one's private life? Don't they want the government out of the bedroom? Then why do they have to have that "piece of paper" they're always saying means nothing? ("We don't need a piece of paper form the government to keep us together.")
Just do your thing, no one is stopping you. Or, fight for legalization, good luck. But please, enough with the drama! If gay marriage never becomes legal, you'll still be able to do everything you like...just without that suddenly all-important piece of paper.
I got news for all the queers out there - even though you are the darlings of the liberal media, the vast majority of americans think you are a bunch of disgusting, disturbed degenerates.
Feel free to whine to the media some more. The ballot box tells you what americans really think of your lifestyle. Missouri was the first of several more "ballot box" wake up calls.
BTW, If you think all techies are queers, think again
Have to wonder how many homosexuals who want to get married think that they are "living in sin in the eyes of God" by living together without being married.
"It's misguided because economic studies indicate a strong correlation between the presence of a gay community and a thriving economy built on clean industries such as computer technology"
This has got to be the biggest load of horsesh** I've read all week. Is this what these idiots really believe?
If someone here wrote that the gay lobby would say "Oh, so you're saying gays aren't family-oriented and spend all their time on the computer? Homophobe!"
Curious to me how the gay community is always referred to as if it were Shangra-la. No crime, no pollution, no unemployment, no blight of any kind. And if allowed to marry, no domestic violence and never any divorce. In short, a constant state of perfect.
Although a measure to amend the U.S. Constitution failed in the Senate a few weeks ago, the debate provides a window to the motives of its supporters.Christian conservatives wanted to put every senator on the spot. Those who favored the amendment were for family values and preserving marriage. Those who voted against the amendment were painted as "liberals" or "anti-family."
Let the record show that only Senators John Edwards and John Kerry DID NOT VOTE. Easier to flip-flop on the issue that way.
Libs like this author claim that such state legislation is unconstitutional and then they poo poo the notion of making a constitutional ammendment (often citing "states' rights").
Couples that pushed for same sex marriage are already pushing for same sex divorce.
This whole gay marriage issue is such a load of horse plop.
The vast majority of homosexuals engage is sex like goats, at least among the males, the females may have a few less notches in their appliances but that is a side issue.
Most of the male variety have many novel and unique methods of engaging in anonomous sex. About 50% of them have >500 unique sexual partners in a life time.
Those that pretend to engage in monogomous sex usually have 3 additional partners a year.
Monogamy among the deviant is just a further abberation. It is the minority of the minority. If 3% of the population is gay then only about 10% of the 3% is truely committed for life and monogamous..
Ignoring for now that there are also incidents of rape, incest, interspecies sex, and cannibalism in the animal kingdom I wonder how many of those animals are monogamous with their same sex "partner" or are devoutly homosexual.
Just because a dog humps your leg, a stuffed doll, or the neighbor's male dog does not indicate any sort of sexual preference other than "getting off NOW!".
Again, I'm not against gay marriage, but what's next? Will they demand billions of dollars of research be invested on making men pregnant? I mean, it's a Peronhood Right to bear children, right?
It's not even about letting people do their own thing--who the hell is stopping them from making legal arrangements and inventing their own vows or whatever?--it's about making everyone else LIKE what they're doing.
Don't they know you can't legislate morality, which is a cliche they love to use regarding abortion?
Peronhood = Personhood
From: Monty Python's The Life Of Brian
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.