Don't legalize gay marriage

Wednesday, June 25, 2003

Just imagine gay same-sex immigration opportunities. That's just what we need right now... /sarcasm

Denied A Life Together When heterosexual Americans want to spend their lives with a partner born in another country, they simply file the appropriate paperwork and wait. Unless there are unusual circumstances, such as a criminal background, it is only a matter of time before the foreign partner is granted permanent resident status. Since gay and lesbians cannot get engaged or legally married they are denied these same fundamental human rights. There is no provision in the law that addresses this injustice. Read more about U.S. Law by clicking here.

Since gay and lesbians cannot get engaged or legally married they are denied these same fundamental human rights.

Nope, they have exactly the same fundamental human rights to marry as everyone else, redefining the definition of marriage is not being denied the same right.

(s) If anyone goes to the sudan and buy a human being would the united states law allow that person to keep the slave? Its legal in the sudan. (/s)

Nope, they have exactly the same fundamental human rights to marry as everyone else,...

Agreed. I'll drag a "less government" argument into this, too. Marriage is hallowed by human beings because it supports the family unit, which is how we procreate and continue the tribe's existence. It takes resources to support marriage; government paperwork, legal actions, and so forth. We shouldn't dillute our efforts to protect heterosexual marriage by getting ourselves distracted by gay legal bonds and all the issues those relationships involve.

Conservatives can demand less government by keeping marriage focussed on men and women uniting. With the divorce courts busy dealing with those relationships, I'd hate to see the tax bill for doubling our quadrupling the legal activity to satisfy gays hopping into and out of legal arrangements together on a whim.

The elites would have to force it upon us like they forced abortion. And even if they succeeded, unlike in Canada it would never be quietly accepted. We Americans are made of the "right stuff."

Canada's people do not accept it either, its just their out of control socialist government. I hope alberta follows up on their actions.

It time people stopped being silent. The homos have shouted down indignation. Time to shout back.

H.J.RES.56 Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. Sponsor: Rep Musgrave, Marilyn N.

[R CO-4] (introduced 5/21/2003) Cosponsors: 75 Latest Major Action: 6/25/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COSPONSORS(75), BY DATE [order is left to right]: (Sort: alphabetical order) Rep Hall, Ralph M. - 5/21/2003 [D-TX-4] Rep McIntyre, Mike - 5/21/2003 [D-NC-7] Rep Peterson, Collin C. - 5/21/2003 [D-MN-7] Rep Davis, Jo Ann - 5/21/2003 [R- VA-1] Rep Vitter, David - 5/21/2003 [R- LA-1] Rep Pitts, Joseph R. - 6/2/2003 [R- PA-16] Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. - 6/2/2003 [R- MD-6] Rep Goode, Virgil H., Jr. - 6/2/2003 [R- VA-5] Rep Wilson, Joe - 6/2/2003 [R- SC-2] Rep Weldon, Dave - 6/2/2003 [R- FL-15] Rep Pence, Mike - 6/10/2003 [R- IN-6] Rep Istook, Ernest J., Jr. - 6/10/2003 [R- OK-5] Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. - 6/10/2003 [R- NC-3] Rep Ryun, Jim - 6/10/2003 [R- KS-2] Rep Johnson, Sam - 6/10/2003 [R- TX-3] Rep DeMint, Jim - 6/10/2003 [R- SC-4] Rep Akin, W. Todd - 6/10/2003 [R- MO-2] Rep Burgess, Michael C. - 6/10/2003 [R- TX-26] Rep Norwood, Charlie - 6/10/2003 [R- GA-9] Rep King, Steve - 6/24/2003 [R- IA-5] Rep Isakson, Johnny - 6/24/2003 [R- GA-6] Rep Souder, Mark E. - 6/24/2003 [R- IN-3] Rep Kennedy, Mark R. - 6/24/2003 [R- MN-6] Rep Miller, Jeff - 6/25/2003 [R- FL-1] Rep Lewis, Ron - 6/25/2003 [R- KY-2] Rep Hayes, Robin - 7/8/2003 [R- NC-8] Rep Barrett, J. Gresham - 7/8/2003 [R- SC-3] Rep Burns, Max - 7/8/2003 [R- GA-12] Rep Collins, Mac - 7/8/2003 [R- GA-8] Rep Rogers, Mike D. - 7/8/2003 [R- AL-3] Rep Wamp, Zach - 7/8/2003 [R- TN-3] Rep Stenholm, Charles W. - 7/8/2003 [D-TX-17] Rep Hoekstra, Peter - 7/10/2003 [R- MI-2] Rep Brady, Kevin - 7/10/2003 [R- TX-8] Rep Whitfield, Ed - 7/10/2003 [R- KY-1] Rep Hunter, Duncan - 7/10/2003 [R- CA-52] Rep Doolittle, John T. - 7/10/2003 [R- CA-4] Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. - 7/10/2003 [R- SC-1] Rep Cantor, Eric - 7/10/2003 [R- VA-7] Rep Gingrey, Phil - 7/15/2003 [GA-11] Rep Davis, Lincoln - 7/15/2003 [D-TN-4] Rep Pickering, Charles W. (Chip) - 7/15/2003 [R- MS-3] Rep Wicker, Roger F. - 7/15/2003 [R- MS-1] Rep Taylor, Gene - 7/17/2003 [D-MS-4] Rep Herger, Wally - 7/17/2003 [R- CA-2] Rep Sullivan, John - 7/22/2003 [R- OK-1] Rep Garrett, Scott - 7/22/2003 [R- NJ-5] Rep Tauzin, W. J. (Billy) - 7/22/2003 [R- LA-3] Rep Cubin, Barbara - 7/22/2003 [R- WY] Rep Forbes, J. Randy - 7/23/2003 [R- VA-4] Rep Smith, Christopher H. - 7/23/2003 [R- NJ-4] Rep Schrock, Edward L. - 7/23/2003 [R- VA-2] Rep Pombo, Richard W. - 7/23/2003 [R- CA-11] Rep Hayworth, J. D. - 7/23/2003 [R- AZ-5] Rep Stearns, Cliff - 7/23/2003 [R- FL-6] Rep Cunningham, Randy (Duke) - 7/23/2003 [R- CA-50] Rep Pearce, Stevan - 7/23/2003 [R- NM-2] Rep Hyde, Henry J. - 7/23/2003 [R- IL-6] Rep Barton, Joe - 7/23/2003 [R- TX-6] Rep Boehner, John A. - 7/23/2003 [R- OH-8] Rep Gutknecht, Gil - 7/23/2003 [R- MN-1] Rep Peterson, John E. - 7/23/2003 [R- PA-5] Rep Tiahrt, Todd - 7/23/2003 [R- KS-4] Rep Franks, Trent - 7/23/2003 [R- AZ-2] Rep Carter, John R. - 7/24/2003 [R- TX-31] Rep Emerson, Jo Ann - 7/24/2003 [R- MO-8] Rep Chocola, Chris - 7/24/2003 [R- IN-2] Rep Rohrabacher, Dana - 7/24/2003 [R- CA-46] Rep Crane, Philip M. - 7/24/2003 [R- IL-8] Rep Shuster, Bill - 7/24/2003 [R- PA-9] Rep Sessions, Pete - 7/24/2003 [R- TX-32] Rep Beauprez, Bob - 7/24/2003 [R- CO-7] Rep Ballenger, Cass - 7/25/2003 [R- NC-10] Rep Myrick, Sue - 7/25/2003 [R- NC-9] Rep Toomey, Patrick J. - 7/25/2003 [R- PA-15]

Congressional Directory

David C. Osborne

MY RESPONSE TO THOSE FREEPERS WHO OPPOSE HJR 56...

First and foremost this is NOT petty... it is critical in this day and age that we RE-AFFIRM our MORAL foundation. I AGREE with those opponents who are concerned that the U.S. Constitution should not have to be this SPECIFIC, ....HOWEVER, our JUSTICE system has failed us miserably... by equating a union of two people of the same sex to MARIAGE....

this is a HUGE step in destroying the MORAL foundation of our laws.

I believe that by NOT passing this ammendment the effect will be exactly what some opponenets fear will occur if we DO pass it......

IMHO, it will encourage leftists to try to put their own crap into our laws using the judiciary, and taking advantage of its failure to ensure decisions are grounded in MORALITY........

This Ammendment will send the message LOUD AND CLEAR to our JUDICIARY that we WANT them to make decisions that are grounded in MORALITY and if they don't know what that is then WE THE PEOPLE will have to explain it to them in the CONSTITUTION!!!

this is why it is important to write to your reps at

http://www.house.org

and

http://www.senate.org

under believe it or not, under a frequent flyer forum

there are leftist wackos already fighting this. (these are the same sensitive anti-diversity diversity people who oppose Delta Airlines use of the Boy Scouts as the Charity of the Quarter.)

Stop the Anti-gay Constitutional Amendment
http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttravel_forum/Forum44/HTML/014079.html

an example of why we have to be vigilant. They "claim" 10,000 digital signatures.

To those freepers who forget. The issue of same sex marrige not being a federal issue is gone. It has been decided and MADE a federal issue. It demands and requires a federal solution. It is unfortunate but it is the way it is now.