Vermont legalizes gay marriage with veto override

Associated Press ^

[wk4bush2004]

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Vermont has become the fourth state to legalize gay marriage — and the first to do so with a legislature's vote.

[gleeaikin]

Given the danger and high treatment cost of AIDS, we should be in favor of stable monogamous relationships. The money we can save in tax/public health dollars will sooth any distress I might feel over gay marriage.

Manc, please refer to homos as homos unless you are using that word as a possive rather than a noun, as in “the homo’s plan is for homos to be able to marry everywhere.”

[gleeaikin]

“do you think that a man sticking his penis into another man’s arse....is normal or natural?”

I recently glanced through a 1995 book about unusual sex practices. This book stated that studies indicate that about 30% of heterosexual couples have tried anal sex. I suspect the figure is higher 14 years later. I know that 50 years ago, it was almost unheard of. Forty-five years ago I was talking to some people from Latin America and was surprised to learn that a certain amount of heterosexual anal sex was engaged in to “preserve virginity” and also the “prevent pregnancy” given the church prohibitions against contraception. This seemed logically inconsistant, but perhaps condoms were hard to buy there.

[gleeaikin]

My bad, I meant to say possessive, not possive. It’s late, I am going to sleep now.

[Andy'smom]

Hi manc, It’s going about the same as always. Your “friend” Greg is always stirring up trouble!

[Condorman]

manc: do you think that a man sticking his penis into another man’s arse....is normal or natural?

gleeaikin:[A 1995 book about unusual sex practices] stated that studies indicate that about 30% of heterosexual couples have tried anal sex.

I'm told that heterosexual anal sex might even go back to the 70s. (The link is entirely safe.)

[Condorman]

Your signal to noise ratio is on a steep decline.

You said, "I can tell you how your relationship not marriage is worth less," followed by 6 paragraphs of foaming at the mouth, including the startling revelation that when I cross state lines I am "nothing but two homo’s [sic] having sex".

Have some chamomile tea, take a deep breath, and try again. How does the legal union of two persons of the same sex devalue an existing legal union between two persons of the opposite sex?

[Condorman]

Manc is not inconsistent

manc complained that homos are doing on their forums what he is doing here, specifically, telling like-minded people where to move and how to vote in order to push their chosen agenda. I thought "inconsistent" was a more diplomatic term than "rank hypocrisy."

[freedomwarrior998]

How does the legal union of two persons of the same sex devalue an existing legal union between two persons of the opposite sex?

Because two people of the same sex cannot and do not have a "marriage." (See: Jones v. Hallahan) By using government force to make other individuals acknowledge and embrace what is impossible, you devalue both freedom and marriage.

It's the same as with counterfeit currency. The counterfeit money devalues the real thing.

Marriage requires a male and a female. Anything else is a cheap counterfeit that devalues and destroys the institution.

[manc]

wonder how he felt when his messiah was about to do the vets benefits? When I get time I'll pop over there

[manc]

so what, I don’;t care if it goes back a thousand years

it doesn’t change how I think

you might like sucking on another man and you might like sticking your penis up him before hand but many in this country, sorry the majority in this country find you sick and certainly weird /

[manc]

are you just not understanding anything

my marriage is between a man and a woman, it has been like that for years and years infact since the birth of this nation.

you on the other hand think it is perfect normal and you have a right to marry your fellow homo.

you d not.

we have a marriage between a man and a woman that is it

for every argument you use to have your sick homo marriage , then every group can use that same argument,

This is not just about marriage it is about your sick agenda,
one only has to look at MA to see how wick you homo’s are

marriage
then you want adoption
then you want to teach kids in public schools that you are normal and that is it is normal to have two dads instead of a mother and a father

all this time you and your ilk are pretending to play happy families
you surround yourselves with your fellow toilet hangers around and then you tell each other you are normal
when someone says you are not you and your fellow toilet hanging around pals then go and attack that person i.e. CA

you can keep harping on and on but you’ll never be accepted

[manc]

correct but this condor person seems to not understand that

[manc]

you really do not understand do you?

ARF

Again I am saying if every conservative moved out of liberal states and went to swing states then we’d have more of a base

which of course is your worst nightmare

The queers/homo’s have been for donkey years been telling their fellow homo’s to move to an area , to take it over and then they can get their people into place to push their agenda.

One has been doing it for years
the other as in me is saying maybe we should

[manc]

could you explain that to condor man who seems to think that his homosexual relationship, he calls it marriage is the same and doesn’t devalue ours

[manc]

WOW

I have just read couple of pages of condor mans posts and all I can say is WOW
you would have to read it to believe it

[little jeremiah]

It is not rank hypocrisy. Why?

Because homosexuals conspire to destroy previously normal and scenic and conservatives locations and turn them into leftist homosexual enclaves. I’ve seen it happen to one place that I used to live. Turned the beaches into naked sodomy fests that no normal person can now visit.

OTOH, manc wants to consolidated conservative, normal people to withstand the destruction homosexuals are causing.

There is a difference, here it is and I will spell it out for clearly (doesn’t matter, obviously you are morally blind, deaf, dumb and dead):

1. Conservative moral values: Good, foundation for human civilization.

2. Homosexuality and its attend agenda: Evil, one of the causes of destruction of human civilization.

There is not only no equivalence, but they are diametrically in opposition. If you don’t see this, then you are on the wrong side of the battle.

[Condorman]

It's the same as with counterfeit currency. The counterfeit money devalues the real thing.

False analogy.

Marriage requires a male and a female.

So you say. The VT legislature and the Iowa Supreme Court disagree. What makes you right and them wrong?

Anything else is a cheap counterfeit that devalues and destroys the institution.

To make this argument, one must believe that "marriage" is a finite quantity. That when two gays have some marriage, there is somehow less marriage for the hetero couples. I confess that this argument puzzles me. Perhaps you can expand on your thesis?

[Condorman]

I find your fixation on the specifics of male homosexual sex somewhat telling. Almost as much as your immediate and unfounded assumption that I am a homosexual.

I care not a whit about changing what you think. I merely asked you to explain how a marriage between two consenting adults had any direct effect on the marriage between two other consenting adults.

That you chose instead to post another explicit description of man-on-man sex acts might be the best answer you can give.

[Condorman]

if every conservative moved out of liberal states and went to swing states then we’d have more of a base

The queers/homo’s have been for donkey years been telling their fellow homo’s to move to an area , to take it over and then they can get their people into place to push their agenda.

One has been doing it for years
the other as in me is saying maybe we should

So, to be clear, you are criticizing the homosexuals' use of a tactic that you suggest conservatives employ. Please be far away when your cognitive dissonance reaches critical mass.

[manc]

your past posts are indeed very telling of you and where you stand on on many issues.
Do you just like to have arguments ?

Anyway
you have had your answer on at least now 3 occasions off me and others ,. If you have not understood those answers given to you then that is not my problem.

you missed this before
every argument which liberals, homo’s and yourself have used can be used for any kind of marriage.
one man 5 women
why couldn’t muslims have 4 wives, their religion says they can?
why can’t the LDS have 7 wives to a man, their religion says so too?
why can;t a mother marry her son , hey after all you said it is about love and that society should promote love(ARF)
Why can’t that woman marry her dog, she loves that dog
why can’t the sister marry her brother, they love each other?

every whack job loony relationship should be legal according to you and the rest of the homo’s .
EVERY argument whether about their privacy,. 4 walls, your argument of society promoting loving relationships to even how does it affect you.

Do you seriously not see that??????????????????????

Besides homo’s are not interested in just marriage, they want to adopt kids to brainwash them,
they then want it teach ed in the schools without parents knowing.