"I wanna get married."
Posted on 12/04/2009 5:04:44 AM PST by HogsBreath
New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn got angry and tearful at a news conference Thursday when asked about the failure of the gay marriage bill in the state Senate. She took exception to questions that she could have done more to stop lawmakers from voting down the legislation.
"There are 60-plus people in that room, and they're the ones with a job to do," she said, referring to the senators. "They are the ones who failed, not anyone else."
Quinn is openly gay and says she looks forward to the day when she can marry her partner, but she is worried that their fathers, who are in their 80s, might not get a chance to see them dance at their wedding.
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxny.com ...
This gay marriage stuff makes me laugh. I still don’t get how they can claim they don’t have equal rights, when in facts, their rights are exactly equal to those of heterosexuals. No man, gay or straight, can marry another man. Why? Because that’s not what marriage is.
How do lesbians “consummate” their marriage?
With a lick and a promise?
Just asking, inquiring minds want to know.
Every papa's dream, I'm sure.....
Awwwwww, the poor widdle vagitarian!
I’m certain she flosses.
"I wanna get married."
Where’s my little violin?
How horrible....she can’t get a licker license!
“Because that’s not what marriage is.”
That’s the frustrating part of this whole matter.
It comes down to the fact that from the inception of this country marriage has had one definition.
And prior to our nation’s founding marriage has had one definition in the judeo/christian world for millenia.
But see - it’s that “judeo/christian” thing they don’t like.
So they want to pretend it’s just a silly little thing to completely change the ENTIRE meaning of the word.
It’s like pointing at blue and announcing we will now call it red.
I’ve got friends that act like only knuckle dragging hicks could possibly oppose gay marriage. “What does their love have to do with you?” “why does one group get to define what marriage is?” “What are you afraid of? Why do you hate these people?”
Which misses the point.
I don’t hate them. They can call themselves anything they want = just don’t make demands of me that I have to change my vocabulary to suit others.
Oh... and they have VIDEOS too! /s FOLSOM STREET FAIR 2009
Why are they always so ugly?
May the blessing of aids be bestowed upon this POS for her lifestyle and beliefs.
Molon Labe,
NSNR
Get a clue lady! The majority of Americans don't want gay "marriage"!
Marriage goes back much farther than that. Apparantly, one of the earliest recorded evidences of the institution derive from ancient Babylon, circa 1790 BC.
It’s like pointing at blue and announcing we will now call it red.
I agree.
I’ve got friends that act like only knuckle dragging hicks could possibly oppose gay marriage. “What does their love have to do with you?” “why does one group get to define what marriage is?” “What are you afraid of? Why do you hate these people?”
Tolerance can often be a cop-out. Not that I advocate intolerance per se, but it's very easy just to go along to get along, and never make a judgement about anything. I've dealt with that in many spheres. It leaves the task of leadership to someone else, where the followers, the go-alongers, can sit back and feel good about not having to take a position.
I don’t hate them. They can call themselves anything they want = just don’t make demands of me that I have to change my vocabulary to suit others.
I agree. The complaint used to be that they wanted certain rights that only married couples had--things like end of life decisions, visitation, shared benefits, etc. Here in NJ, they passed civil union legislation that fixed that for them. And guess what? It's not good enough. They want to legally call it marriage. Why pester conventional norms? Why harass tradition? If you get the practical rights you want, why not leave it be?
Civil marriage somewhat confuses the issue, and I say that as someone who was married by a justice of the peace. But in my view there is no conflict there. The law is merely recognizing a well-worn tradition. It doesn't claim to have created it. It merely recognizes and facilitates it in the civic sphere.
Anyway, I continue to maintain that marriage rights as they stand today are perfectly equal. Is it illegal for a gay man to marry a woman? No. Is it illegal for a gay woman to marry a man? No. Then there is no discrimination based on sexual orientation.
If they wanted to argue for gay marriage just because they want it, it would annoy me a lot less. What irks me is this idea that it is a denial of rights. Maybe I am in love with my bicycle. Do I therefore deserve the right to marry it??
“If they wanted to argue for gay marriage just because they want it”
That’s what they want today.
One day after winning that battle - they beging to fight over the curriculum in the schools.
They begin to tweak the hate crime legislation to go after the churches - and families who continue to teach their children marriage is only between a man and a woman.
beging = begin (sheesh!)
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.