E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Jay Laprete / AP file
Sen. Rob Portman at left, rides with his son, Will, in Ohio on Aug. 11, 2012.
Republican Senator Rob Portman has announced his support for same-sex marriage, saying he reversed his position on the divisive social issue after his son came out as gay.
“I have come to believe that if two people are prepared to make a lifetime commitment to love and care for each other in good times and in bad, the government shouldn't deny them the opportunity to get married,” Portman wrote in an op-ed published Friday in the Columbus Dispatch.
“That isn’t how I’ve always felt. As a congressman, and more recently as a senator, I opposed marriage for same-sex couples. Then something happened that led me to think through my position in a much deeper way," Portman wrote in the op-ed.
The decision came after long consideration, the Ohio lawmaker told newspapers from his home state on Thursday. Portman’s 21-year-old son Will, who is a junior at Yale University, discussed his sexual orientation with Portman and his wife in 2011, the senator said.
His son said that his sexuality was “not a choice, it was who he is and that he had been that way since he could remember,” Portman told Cleveland.com during an interview in his Washington, D.C. office.
“It allowed me to think of this from a new perspective, and that’s of a dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities that his brother and sister would have – to have a relationship like Jane and I have had for over 26 years,” Portman told reporters during that interview.
Portman’s changed stance comes amid spreading support for same-sex marriage. Forty-eight percent of Americans supported same-sex marriage in 2012, up from 35 percent a decade ago, according to a Pew Research Center analysis from Dec. 2012.
Jeff Swinger / The Cincinnati Enquirer via AP, file
U.S. Sen. Rob Portman is greeted by his daughter Sally, left, and son Will after finishing the Paddlefest, an annual Cincinnati event, on Saturday, June 23, 2012.
Arguments challenging a section of the Defense of Marriage Act, which Portman voted for in 1996, and the California constitutional provision that limits marriage to one man-one woman unions, are due to be heard before the Supreme Court later this month.
Portman called Speaker of the House John Boehner to tell Boehner of his decision to support same-sex marriage.
“Senator Portman is a great friend and ally, and the Speaker respects his position, but the Speaker continues to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,” said Michael Steel, a spokesman for Boehner.
In his commentary for the Columbus Dispatch, Portman said, “The process of citizens persuading fellow citizens is how consensus is built and enduring change is forged. That’s why I believe change should come about through the democratic process in the states. Judicial intervention from Washington would circumvent that process as it’s moving in the direction of recognizing marriage for same-sex couples. An expansive court ruling would run the risk of deepening divisions rather than resolving them.”
Ohio voters adopted an amendment to the state constitution in 2004 that said only a marriage between one man and one woman would be legally recognized in the state. The measure passed with 62 percent of the vote. According to Cleveland.com, Portman said that if Ohio voters were to reconsider that constitutional provision, “he might support it, depending on its wording ... .”
Portman was considered a potential vice presidential candidate to run with Mitt Romney in the last presidential election, and acted as a surrogate for the Romney campaign in the important swing state of Ohio.
Prominent Ohio conservative Senator Rob Portman, once considered for Mitt Romney's running mate, is speaking out about gay marriage in support of his son, who is gay, just as Romney gets set to give his first public speech since the election today. NBC's Peter Alexander reports.
Portman told Romney that his son was gay, the senator said in an interview with CNN that aired Friday.
“I told Mitt Romney everything,” Portman said of the vetting he underwent last year. “That process is, intrusive would be one way to put it. But, no, yeah, I told him everything.”
Mitt Romney adviser Beth Myers, who led the vice presidential vetting process, confirmed to NBC News Friday morning that that the campaign was aware Sen. Rob Portman's son was gay as they vetted him for the number 2 job – but that the situation played "no role whatsoever" in Romney's decision about who to pick as his running mate.
"It did not play a role," she said. Myers said that Portman told the campaign about the fact that his son was gay.
Myers said Portman called her on Thursday evening to tell her about his decision to switch his position and come out in support of gay marriage.
In the interview with Cleveland.com, Portman said that he believes the issue of same-sex marriage is “more generational than it is partisan.” He said that former Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter is a lesbian, told him to “do the right thing, follow your heart.”
Portman said he also considered his Christian faith, which led him to decide that “in a way, this strengthens the institution of marriage.”
“The overriding message of love and compassion that I take from the Bible, and certainly from the Golden Rule, and that fact that I believe we are all created by our maker, that has all influenced me in terms of my change on this issue,” Portman said, according to Cleveland.com.
“Especially proud of my dad today,” Will Portman tweeted on Friday with a link to the Columbus Dispatch op-ed.
The announcement came the same day as fellow Republican Senator Marco Rubio reiterated his opposition to same-sex marriage at a conservative gathering.
“Just because I believe that states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot,” Rubio told the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday.
NBC News' Kasie Hunt and Frank Thorp contributed to this report.
Conservative Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, reveals during an interview with CNN that he has changed course on his opinion of same-sex marriage, and he now supports it because his son has come out as openly gay.
This story was originally published on Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:03 AM EDT
Leave a Comment:
This will be like watching the cartoon character try to keep plugging leaks in the dam.
The smart ones are jumping ship now.
The rest will become appropriately extinct.
Gee, you mean what the gay community has been telling the thumpers for decades now??
The Party of Irrelephant continues to amaze.
It never ceases to amaze me.
Portman is anti-gay rights until he has a gay family member. Cheney was, too.
Nancy Reagan (and her husband) were anti-stem cell research until Ronald got Alzheimer's.
Rights don't matter until they matter to you. How these people can go through most of their lives without developing the ability to empathize - to simply understand how others feel - is utterly confounding. Now that's a choice.
Hey, here's a crazy Idea. Why don't we get the government out of the marriage business all together. Why not adhere to "separation of church and state"? The States should only give "co-habitation contracts" to anybody, Gay or straight. Let the Church do the marry thingy, like it's supposed to.
EQUALITY FOR ALL.
George
Part of the issue is rights under IRS rules. The government has a vested interest in getting this right.
Plus, this is a civil right, not a states right. Civil rights should never be left up to individual states. If that were so we would still be seeing "Whites Only" water fountains, restrooms and restaurants in states like Texas, Mississippi and many other backward southern states.
I would never, ever depend on the church to do the right thing. That's a pipe dream. Some would but unfortunately not the majority. I just don't have that level of faith in them.
Wide is the way that leads to destruction and MANY there be that follow!!
Ahh.. More republicans are leaving the 'flock' to ensure all Americans are have equal marriage rights. Once SCOTUS rules in June, ALL republicans will then say "we always supported gay rights".
george pauljohn
I understand where you are coming from, but religion does NOT own the word marriage. Holy Matrimony in Christianity perhaps... but marriage is also a secular term.
Great post, Physicist. You can add to this list of conservative list of shame Rush Limbaugh ceasing his condemnation of drug addicts only AFTER he was busted for being one. It never ceases to amaze me either.
if his son jumped off a bridge would he follow. his son deserves his respect family is family i would live with son or daughter choice i would love them irregardless but i would also expect them to respect my feeling also what is right for them does not mean its right for me
Time for the Republican Zombies to eat him alive!
I got it. To cure this disease called the GOP all we need to do is have every Republican have a gay child. That seems to be the only way to teach them how to be empathetic towards gays.
The choices we make, make us who we are.
We (our ego's, our will's) are more formed by social factors than genetic.
I don't think anyone would care about Gay Marriage if Marriage didn't come with benefits. For instance, if you died, and you lived with someone, it wouldn't go to them unless you were married, it would go to your next of kin, at least without a living will. Did your parents hate your lover? Good luck getting into the funeral then, because you have absolutely no rights. It was the last bastion of the religious to cut gays off from having equal benefits.
Even then, Religion is constantly trying to tell us how to live. The FCC won't let us curse on the network, nudity is thought of shameful and evil, sex is still this epic taboo, meanwhile I can turn the TV on about 4 PM, on a normal cable station, and watch someone get their head blown off. We'll be glad to get out of your religion good sirs and madams... just get the hell out of our laws, our politics, and our normal lives.
Do a search on Youtube for "IT COULD HAPPEN TO YOU". It features a gay man who lost his lover, with his lover's parents taking his lover's things, barring him from the funeral, and doing all they could to stomp on their son's memory of love for their crazy beliefs and hatred.
Also, I kind of expected this. Even Dick Cheney went ahead and supported his daughter, even though he was Bush's right wing man. They're all for hatred against Gays until it's their kids, I expect the sentiment is the same for most parents, especially Christian ones. They hate gays too, unless they it happens to be their kid, then suddenly support suddenly clicks in their mind.
No, no and no.
The church has Holy Matrimony, not marriage. Marriage has always been a civil institution.
We don't need religion to pick and choose who deserves to be married. Not that they aren't influencing political decisions already.
Williamorrights - Everything is a choice, including sexuality. The biggest lie is, I can't help it. If you cheat, it is a choice, if you choose to sodomize another man, it is a choice.
Homosexuals have a right to do whatever unnatural sexual act they want to and with whomever they want to but I they want to force everyone to accept it, as right. I don't believe in being mean to someone but I also don't believe in supporting something that I know is wrong. If you don't think men sodomizing each other or preforming oral sex on each other is wrong, then you need to ask a doctor what your rectum is for...
Change is slow and if you will remember it took the democrats quite a while to accept civil rights for blacks. Times are changing and more and more republicans are coming to grips with the fact that gays are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. So instead of insulting the few that are coming around, for whatever reason, we should be embracing them.
No it isn't.
That's the hysterical part you just can't fathom.
Why do you think Portman's son is lying??
Did you "choose" to be righthanded, 5 foot 10 inches with brown hair???
Most importantly do you "choose" everyday to be straight??
Most importantly was it a tough "choice"??
If it was I have some news for you.
You can come out, but you can't hide. The operative word is "weird".
He would be stoned to death in a Theocracy like Iran (or at the Vatican only a few tortoise lifetimes ago). Good for him. Extending civil rights to all Americans is always a win. What a concept, eh?
Give Rob Portman credit ... for being moderate on this issue.
It's really his Gay son who has change Rob. At least his family member can change his view, so he is not really an ideologue. We have taken notice. Give credit where credit is due.
disgusting
"He said that former Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter is a lesbian, told him to “do the right thing, follow your heart.”
How can Cheney offer any sound advice about something he has never possessed?
William,
Smart no. Politically expedient yes.
Dennis,
Really? A civil right? There is nothing preventing homosexual men and women from getting married. I'm sure the Civil Rights leaders of the 1960s would appreciate you equating their struggle that some of them gave their lives for to the radical liberal/progressive gay agenda of changing the definition of a word.
Boby-1851312
You mean the state of our public education system??
jmsmith must have a pretty boring sex life!
@WilliamOfRites...........Yes.
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_22599953/bob-huff-elimination-algebra-requirement-wrong-direction-california
Choice? Please. Such statements are always an excuse for bigotry.
Yes Dick, I am sure they would appreciate the use of "civil rights." The right to be treated equally regardless of race, sex, religion, and sexual orientation. Only bigots hate it, and fight every addition to the concept of equality. Their problem, of course, is that equality is for everyone, not just the special ones that you want it to apply to. That is the definition of inequality.
Life is an education, physicist-retired. Until you know, work with, or have a family relative who is openly homosexual, it is a lot easier to accept the stereo-types and dismiss all such people as second class human beings.
Well, another GOP has grown a brain, and thus is lost to CPAC forever. Maybe, someday, GOP will no longer stand for Goofy Old Politicians.
Maybe. Some day.
I think you'll have to define 'unnatural', jm. We observe homosexual behavior throughout the animal kingdom. Literally hundreds of species have been observed engaging in homosexual activities - everything from amoebas to fleas to frogs to snakes to fish to birds to raccoons to bison to (you guessed it) humans.
Does an amoeba make a 'choice'?
If homosexuality is 'unnatural', why is it so prevalent in nature (a bit of an oxymoron, don't you think?).
Physicist-retired and John PaulGeorge,
Wow, did you guys get lost and somehow end up on a blog you didnt intend? Two, back-to-back good, thoughtful, relevant and correct points in a row is virtually unheard of here! Well done! You are both spot on. Cheney, and now Portman's personal interest causing them to do the right thing, after being akin to Spanish Inquisitors before learning of their family's circumstances speak for themselves. And, if the state would stay out of matters that should be reserved for the church (and vice versa), we could finally get something right. I have never had a family member -- to my knowledge -- who is gay, yet I fully support their rights -- and always have. Why in the world shouldn't I?
George Pauljohn,
Government is out of the religious aspects of the marriage business. Any religion can have its own rules for a marriage ceremony. The government encompasses the legal aspects of the union. Religions don't own marriage. That would be madness. One denomination might not accept the marriage of another denomination. So the government (state government) works with denominations and ministers that lets them administer the ceremony according to their own rules. Those that do not want a religious ceremony can get a cvivil union. And that is all churches have to do with marriage. The rest of the legal aspects of marriage are not part of churches.
There is in fact a separation and it has been in place for a long time.
He changed his position because of what? So if his son comes out with Adult-child attraction is he going to start supporting pedophiles too? Also, if his son is choosing to identify himself as homosexual than how is that part not his choice?
And this does this how?
And yes Virginia, it is a choice. Everyone chooses whether or not to do millions of things in their life, sex included.
jmsmith chooses to be heterosexual. That must mean he is latently homosexual. At anytime he can choose to be gay. I on the other hand am heterosexual. It is who I am. But I don't condemn the person who is homosexual. It's who they are. Religion should be about bringing us together as humans, as children. Religion should not be about tearing us and the fabric of civilization apart. Maybe religion can get it right someday, but probably not in several tortises lifetimes.
Physicist-retired, ameobas can't be homosexual, they are asexual. ROFL
While there are some good points being made....
So this highly educated politician can't see or understand ANY of the real world beyond the walls of his own house???? What else has he voted against or didn't support because he just couldn't see it???
Then he wants us to believe that he had absolutely no idea his son was gay until the son came out?? While that isn't impossible....it just seems a bit improbable...and way too politically convenient.
Sorry - this elected official fully is out of touch - even with his own family.
I saw a video where a chimpanzee that caught a frog and raped it, that was a natural act too. look it up on you tube, its crazy, funny too, but its so wrong at the same time. heres the link if i can post it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DYUeajaEUg
We need to get out of the marriage business altogether, church, state and government. People should do what they want without the confines of a marriage. Marriage stigmatises the unmarried family with children and doesn't allow them to participate in tax benefits. This is no longer needed to grow and stabilize our country and with the high divorce rate certainly not working. The biggest supporters of marriage are the divorce attorney.
Good one IMHO about amoebas, nice to see someone on top of these post.
THis is the typical conservative syndrom: "it only matters if it happened to me." Not able to walk in other's shoes.
A father having empathy for a son makes sense. A Senator who then takes that personal decision and wants to impose that decision on the people who he supposedly represents does not. He was elected based on his prior positions and should immediately resign and stand for re-election based on his new positions and beliefs. That would be the honorable thing to do. However, we in America know that there is as much honor in our govt. leaders as there is water in the Sahara.
Mark440, You live in fantasy. My brother is gay and neither our parents nor me knew it until he was in his mid 40ies and he decided to tell us. Talk to older gay men and they will tell you they hid it, effectively, from their families. My brother has been in the same relationship for 20 years yet we did not know, nor did we even question his sexuality. So saying people are out of touch if they don't know someone is gay is ......well out of touch.
As to gay marriage on a personal and religious level I oppose it. However as a matter of public policy I am against prohibition in most forms. The government should have little to no involvement in marriage especially if that involvement is to tell consisting adults what they can and can't do. Same position I take on drugs, smoking, surgery drinks, ect. Personal choices that do not adversely affect others should not be governed by any government.
Physicist said it right. They stamp on anonimous others rights until one of their own is involved. All of a sudden they think how this will affect someone they know and care about. 180 spin!!!!!!
My wife and I have had this discussion many times. We've come to the conclusion that most people are very bad at seeing the world through other people's eyes. I definitely see this from moral conservatives on issues like gay rights, but I also see it with my liberal friends on issues such as the environment and taxation (i.e.; we shouldn't allow developers to cut down trees - but I should be able to remove the ones blocking my view in my yard, or taxes should be higher - except my property taxes, etc.)
At least 71 amoeba reproduce via sexual activity, IHMO. See Covert Sex, Hurst et. al. 1992.
I don't blame you for not knowing that though - it was a surprise to me, too.
So, anytime a politician changes their position on an issue they should resign? That doesn't seem very reasonable to me. Personally, I want a politician that will constantly evaluate their views and change them if new data convinces them their old position was not the best approach for their constituents.
What bothers me, though, is that he was against it until his son came out. If that hadn't happened he'd have never changed his tune. It doesn't matter anyway, he'll be challenged in a primary next term, and they'll dump millions into a campaign to punish him for deserting the party.
It's the same old thing. So it's horrible until his own child says he is gay. Oh, jim? You have the right to your belief just as anyone else does, and you don't get to tell everyone else how to live. You aren't gay? Okay...so no worries since you won't be doing things with guys. But that is how you were born and isn't how everyone else was born. If you don't agree with that it is your right and feel free to sit and judge, but what others are and choose to do isn't up to you or me. I am very glad that he is supporting his son, since he doesn't have to make that choice, and I wish the same for every other gay person.
Yes, Sabot, how you treat others IS your choice. How each of us is born isn't at all the same thing. Did you choose to be straight? Wonder what day you woke up and decided to be straight? Nope...I didn't think so.
Flaming selfish, it's-all-about-me (incl family) hypocrite. Disgusting.
Ron, I don't mean changing their mind on how much to spend on a particular program or whether to build a bridge to nowhere or if a building should be named after someone. But on issues of constitutionality or extreme social import then I do believe that person owes their constituents an opportunity to speak to those issues.
Actually, I wonder when Rob Portman will come out.
So am I the only one who see's the hypocrisy here? He knew, but as long as his son didn't come out, he was against Gay marriage?
My guess is, this is the process people usually go through when they change a core belief. Most people only associate with like-minded people, so they only hear one point of view. Then, something like this happens and they hear an opposing viewpoint from someone they care deeply about or someone they respect. I think it says good things about the person that they were willing to truly evaluate their position when challenged this way.
Ron,
It's true that those sorts of 'blind spots' are common. You can see it everywhere - from the jerk who just cut you off on the road (who then goes into a rage when someone else does the very same thing to them), to the 'religious' person who rails against the poor, to the 'conservative' who promotes judicial activism (but only when it supports their agenda), to the 'liberal' who remains silent on the Patriot Act, to the 'environmentalist' who fights against wind turbines because they'll 'spoil the view' from their front door.
We all have some level of this, I'm afraid.
But when it comes to human rights, we should be able to hold our elected officials to a higher level of thought and reflection. The televangelist with three mistresses doesn't hurt anyone but those directly involved.
The politician that withholds 1,138 benefits, rights and protections from a couple, based on the fact that they were born gay, does incredible damage.
Because marriage is a civil institution under the law, and has been long before religion became involved. The religious aspect of marriage is merely ceremonial.
What about hetero couples who engage in oral/anal sex? Is that wrong too?
An individual's sexuality is an inborn trait. You seem to confuse behavior with orientation.
Yes, really! Marriage is a civil right, as determined by the SCOTUS itself!
they're not allowed to marry the consenting adults of their choosing in 41 states.
When A CONSERVATIVE
has a death experience with a gun that had NO CONTROLS... look for a change
has a life experience for the health care ... look for a change
has an encounter with a child of an illegal who becomes a friend .... look for a change
has a daughter who is faced with an abortion .... look for a change
has a visit to a motel that shelters homeless children... look for a change
* * * * * *
Turns out, REAL LIFE teaches us a lot....
That's really good news. I've got my eye some really cute farm animals. It's not a choice for me. I must have sex with them.
Sen. Rob Portman apparently decides his positions based on his what's happening around him at very close range. He opposed gay marriage, but now, since his son 'came out', Portman decides that gay marriage is ok.
Did he not KNOW his son was gay? (Apparently, the vetters did, but I guess they didn't bother to tell Portman.)
Is Portman's opinion on gay marriage (then or now - take your pick) a product of moral or philosophical contemplation? Or is it a product of political expediency?
Either way, Portman demonstrates that he does not have the personal moral fiber that a senator should have. (Not really a surprise - nor is he the only politician about whom that can be said.)
I thought Portman only had daughters. Or was that Huntsman?
Regardless of his current stance, I would have to say that he does not seem to be very deliberative in his thinking if his opinion is so easily swayed. He seems to personify the concept of situational ethics.
Well you did mention it but only in passing. Everything can be avoided if a person simply has a will.
I don't understand what all the hoopla is. As a matter of fact, EVERYONE should have a will. I'm married and I can leave everything to someone else and there is nothing my husband can do about it. I can list anyone as my beneficiary too. I can have who and who cannot see me in the hospital and the hospital has to abide by my wishes.
Gotta love the old "it occurs in nature" so it is normal. Well, just because something occurs in nature doesn't mean society has to accept it. Infanticide also occurs in nature, maybe we should allow that.
Seriously? Are you that myopic? Good grief. Civil Rights apply to much more then Black Americans struggling to have the same rights as everybody else. You need to learn to read Dick. Yours is the typical BS drivel we have come to expect from conservative and tea baggers.
Try this on for size "Dick".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_and_political_rights
Tunnel vision is a sad, sad thing. This is why we have come to expect so very little of people like you Dick.
Why did it take him TWO YEARS after his son came out to decide in favor of same-sex marriage? Maybe he thinks the only way he can get re-elected next time around is if he does finally change his position, or he knows something about SCOTUS and their upcoming decisions on both DOMA and Prop 8 that none of the rest of us know?
No, Jo Ann, in most states a will DOES NOT PROTECT a gay couple unless they have an ironclad clause in the will that gives $1.00 to each family member and states that any contention of the will will void even that award. I had to put that clause in my will (and I wasn't in any gay relationship at the time) to make sure that my charitable donations, etc. went where I wanted them to go in OH 25 years ago.
Typical GOP. Always deny, DENY DAMMIT, vote against, until it affects them personally. Then suddenly they are for it. Bunch of asses.
So they can't support the concept of equality for all unless it has a personal connection? And they wonder why they're viewed as hypocrites.
Portman now has two daughters.
Physicist-retired re post 1.2: clicking on the up button wasn't enough. WELL SAID!!!
jmsmith
Out of curiosity, when did you make the conscious choice to be straight? Was there a lot of deliberation that went on? Did you weigh pros and cons?
I never made the conscious choice to be straight, but when people suggest it's a choice, I have to assume they did. I was born straight and am attracted to women, but maybe I'm just a little bit different because I never sat down and tried to weigh the pros and cons. It wasn't a "choice" that I got to make.
Looking forward to your explanation. Thanks!
Ohwell you diverting bigot...
The "it happen in nature" is ALWAYS a reply to peoples saying it's unnatural. As proof that it's not unnatural as the bigot claim.
Then there is always one moron who come in and twist the issue. No one is advocating that we should accept infanticide but if some one said infanticide is not natural then we could point out to him that it occur in nature, hence it's natural.
Pigotry,
I definitely lean right and like to ding you when I can, but I had to vote you up on this one. First for everything, sometimes politics just get in the way.
How sad that so many believe that homosexuality is a "choice" and that it is their business to proffer an opinion on same. What ever happened to live and let live?
To the gay community: I agree that you should be able to marry, divorce, support your kids, etc. just like anyone/everyone else. That said, just live your lives, ignore the noise, but please don't be the noise, either. The haters are ignorant and will NEVER change their minds without a watershed event.
To the gay-bashing community: This may come as a complete surprise to you, but the gay community is NOT recruiting. All you haters need to get over yourselves. Most people do not want to listen to your rants against gay people, they just want to live their lives in peace and are tolerant enough to accept people as they are (criminals excluded). You might want to consider taking that position, it will lower your blood pressure considerably.
Just Wrong
I always found it odd that the small government crowd wanted to outlaw gay marriage. I figured the whole idea of "I wouldn't like one, so I won't have one." would apply here. Get the government out of our lives, right?
Its really amazes me that people still listen to a55holes like this! Even Obama did the same thing, and Cheney too! They were against it, before they were for it! Why do people think they have a say it it. This shouldnt be about gay rights, or marriage rights, or aything at all! It shouldnt even be up for discussion, ...it is simply human rights that no one can accept or deny!
The fact that the IRS needs to "ackolwedge" a marital status for taxes is absurd! The fact that a church has to "bless" it or whatever it does is also ridiculous! If two people, regardless of who you decide to live your life with, decided they are right for eachother...it is NO ONE elses business!
Not all conservatives are opposed to gay marriage, and not all Christians hate gay people. If you are so open minded, than why are you lumping millions of people into one category?
Unfortunately the people who are the craziest and loudest and most incorrect get all of the attention, while the people who are awesome and kind and good never get the credit they are due.
Yes, everyone deserves the right to marry who they want. I shouldn't have to force my faith on someone, when they don't follow it at all. Jesus calls us to "love each other as yourself". He doesn't say "Only love people that you go to church with or act the exact same as you". Jesus hung out with a whole bunch of "sinners" and never condemned them. He just loved, and we are also to love.
Even though we may not agree with your lifestyle, we aren't perfect (I screw up every single day I'm on this planet), and I personally think that marriage is already so unholy now a days that having some more faithful couples in this world couldn't be a bad thing.
Physicist-Retired: You want empathy? Where's the Dems' "empathy" for small business owners? Democrats are just as much, if not more, "my way or the highway." If you personally don't support gay marriage, you're a bully. If you are gay but choose to keep your private life private, every LGBT advocacy group is going to hunt you down and out you anyway. If you take issue with something someone of another race does, you're a racist, regardless of the fact that race had nothing to do with it. Ahh, yes, SO, so tolerant - unless you happen to be different.
I'm from Ohio, and while I welcome Rob Portman's change on GLBT marriage equality I still don't trust him not to have an ulterior motive. I definitely agree that his views are selfish because he only changed when it became personal and not for the greater rights of his citizens. He is a GOP party line hack, despite the views of his constituents. He usually doesn't even bother to send a form letter why he opposed your views and the same Email usually includes a request for money for re-election, even when you opposed his stance.
To those who say that marriage should be left to churches and it isn't a civil right. Marriage was declared to be a civil right if the Loving v. Virginia decision that legalized interracial marriage. Marriage is a civil contract that is irrelevant of the religion of those involved.
What churches do is the sacrament of matrimony and the government cannot and will never be able to tell any religion who they must marry because of the religious protections of the First Amendment. Those same protection keep the government secular with equal rights for all Americans regardless of their beliefs or lack there-of. You don't have to be relgious to be married, so the claim that marriage is a Christian action is utter bumpkus. Many Chuches oppose GLBT marriage but there are also many mainline churches and religions that support GLBT marriage equality.
DOMA laws will be found to be unconstitutional because the majority isn't permitted to use the b ballot box to decide when rights others have, especially when they already enjoy those very same rights. That concept is known as tyranny of the majority and it is the reason that we have the Bill of Rights and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
People will never be able to marry their tractor, their livestock or children because there are 2 limitations on marriage. They must be human, the age of 18 and mental ability to consent, which obviously farm implements, livestock and children lack. I undertand that change is scary for some people, and that many oppose homosexuality for various reasons, but this country was founded on equality and freedom for everyone and not just the WASP majority.
If you dont support GLBT marriage equality then the easy solution for you is not to have one, but it will have no direct effect on you, your family or your religion when others have the same rights that we heteros have always enjoyed.
This whole country is perverted. What difference does it make any more.
Now if Portman could just have a poor son or daughter, then maybe he'd change his views on Medicaide and tuition assistance...
Wait, my bad. He'd work to change the gift tax rules that affected him!
Right on Panic Moon, right on.
That argument can also be used against the people who say it's unnatural to be gay for instance, taking medicine to cure a disease is unnatural, driving cars is unnatural, using a computer is unnatural...etc. Whether it's natural or unnatural doesn't matter (although I believe the former), what does matter is nobody has the right to tell to two consenting adults that they cannot have the same rights as everyone else because of ridiculous reasons like it's unnatural or that a book written 2000 years ago says it's bad. It's time we stop worrying about other peoples personal lives when it has no bearing on anyone else, and start focusing on legitimate problems.
I'm pretty sure most intelligent people know being gay isn't a choice, but what the unintelligent ones who can't grasp the difference between sexual action and sexual orientation are forgetting is that the "choice" is NONE of your business. You also have an implied civil right to privacy, meaning that if that choice isn't infringing on the rights of others it's NOBODY'S business. Not to mention, many of you bigots make the SAME technical choices in YOUR bedrooms, so really maybe YOU shouldn't get married either.
Put that in your "small government" pipe and smoke it.
BMette,
You're kidding right? " Portman demonstrates that he does not have the personal moral fiber that a senator should have. (Not really a surprise - nor is he the only politician about whom that can be said.)"
Name a single politician who has this "personal moral fiber" you're blathering about. I am a dyed in the wool republican and I registered as a democrat so I would have two chances to vote against any democrat I thought was a moron. Unfortunately it's getting harder and harder to find one who isn't. Personal moral fiber. What a joke! I believe in allowing gays the right to marry as long as the same responsibilities and penalties also apply. Divorce, disolution of property, child support, all that. But let's talk about your "personal moral fiber". Would this be the speech by Obama as a senator against deficits or the declaration as president that they are ok. Would it be that Pelosi made 2 million dollars by insider trading that would get you thrown in jail? Would it be any of the senators or congressmen who have been censured (both parties), indicted or prosectuted over the years. Perhaps it would be Nixon who authorized watergate and resigned in disgrace. I agree all members of congress and the president should have "personal Moral fiber" but I again challenge you to NAME one. Wake up and smell the coffee. These are politicians. I applaud him for changing his mind when a different reality is presented to him. Would that you were as open minded.
“Just because I believe that states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot,” Rubio told the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday."
What does this make Rubio..his party wants or calls for a smaller less intrusive government..yet this statement of his gives the states, government, power to deside whatever...what is he really for other than the power of being a politican ? Portman is no different..he changes his mind to go with the flow..and in this case..his son.
@BOB-1224753, boy you put it right out there! the gut fear that homo-phobics often feel: if i support gays and gay issues, i might become one myself. your sexual orientation is not likely teetering on the edge of a cliff. your's changing is likely at just as much as risk as portman's sons is. nil.
of course unless you are repressing your own true orientation. that's a question you'll have to answer for yourself.
I suspect the senator was always at least moderate on his views of gay marriage but because of the GOP litmus test he was required to denounce it. His son showing the strength to come out probably convinced him to man up himself and fight for whats right. I wonder how many of these gay marriage fighters take that stance because they have to to be accepted by their party's dogmatic establishment. My biggest problem with the GOP is with most of their social issues. I can not argue with the statement that the government should operate under a fiscally responsible budget, I can argue against the statement that we are a christian nation (because we are not and never were... and hopefully never will be)
Hummmm It's all about perspective .... Change your "perspective" and your bound to see things differently ... Become "locked" in to your perspective ..you can never see any difference ... (intolerance)
Viewing the subject from multiple perspectives (dimensional) provides a more complete & complex viewpoint ... and (unless the object is a static orb) is bound to change what you see (tolerance)
Congratulations to Senator Portman for his public "epiphany" ... lets hope that he might continue down the right road to support other issues that important to Americans .. whose "natural" rights have been deprived them, and whose socially harmless actions make them criminals ... 55, 000,000 Americans a year use a harmless herb that by its use makes them criminals ....
Legalize Marijuana ... it's the just and "right thing to do" like gay marriage .. and let them live without fear of the law and in harmony with society ..
Farewell to.."The Rights of Man"
BULL - F'ING - $HIT!!!!
I can guarantee you, GUARANTEE YOU, when they were vetting him and that admission came out, as soon as they got out of the interview room, they were frantically calling each other, rapidly/quietly talking into their cell phones -
"...Portman's son is gay! .....I know.. of course we have to tell Romney, this is a dead end!"
YOU LIE THROUGH YOUR TEETH YOU SLIMEBALLS.
Apparently all it takes is for the party that fears the "others" is just to realize they are us. It must be awful to live in such fear all the time. Poor repubs.
The Senator is probably gay too....he just keeps it locked up. His son has more balls. But I still don't care what you say, gay is a choice, not a matter of birth. If you were born with a penis, than you were born to put it in a vagina. If you were born with a vagina, you were born to put it on a penis. End of story
It's sad but ok if his son believes he is totally gay and its ok if he wants to pick an ADULT life partner, but perversions should never be treated as socially "normal". Such things should be kept behind closed doors and out of sight of children.
We don't need a bunch of disturbed boys running around acting like caricatures of girls and performing disease prone sexual acts on each other openly, it will only increase the odds of another aids-type epidemic if nothing else... because the more their disgusting sexual act becomes "normal", a few more overly horny young boys will be seduced into trying it by the Chester the Molester types out there.
Wills can be and are successfully contested. Without the legal backing of marriage law, a gay man or lesbian can lose everything to next of kin. Because marriage confers legal "next of kinship" it is necessary to avoid such disputes. Get it?
I just felt my IQ drop 50 points reading that.
Everyone is gonna go to hell for doing something that superstition defines as a sin UNLESS someone in a GOP family does it? Then it's OK? Has anyone let the gods know about this?
The hypocrite should be voted out of office. He's on the side of right until his son comes out as a twisted fruit then all of a sudden it's ok. No it's not ok even if his kid is a messed up pervert. The view is still the same. He should be even more ashamed of it now. It's like everybody else was queer until it was in his family but now it's all special somehow. If people can't see through this scam they are even more stupid than i thought.
empson: You epitomize the problem with having logical discussions with Christian fundamentalists. Well, in truth, there's the same problem with lib socialists too. It comes down to the fact that your definition differs from most everyone else's definition. Most people refer to sexual orientation as referring to one's attraction. Fundies refer to it as the physical act. The fact is that you are attracted to who you are attracted to. If you are attracted to the same gender then you are gay, period. Whether you act on it or not, that makes no difference. If you do what the fundies seem to want, then as long as you don't act on your gay attractions, then you are not gay. Of course, they say if you want sex, then you have to lie to a member of the opposite sex, get married and force yourself to have sex with someone you are not attracted to. Kinda like if God came down and said "we have too many people in this world, so I decree that thou shalt not lie with a woman as with a man, it is an abomination!" According to the fundies, if they are to be believed, they would all say "bye spouse, I don't want to sin so I've got to go find a partner of the same sex." And, the fundies would be just fine with that?
D.Man at #1.85
Those were my thought too.
To Mark440:
Well, it's not hard to come up with examples of things Republicans don't understand because it's not part of their every-day lives. Remember, these are the same elitists who think that 47% of Americans are freeloaders because they don't pay income tax. They don't see the working poor. They don't see military families. They don't see the elderly. They don't see loving, committed same-sex couples. They don't know any hard working single moms, or hard working immigrants struggling to become legal citizens. They don't see patients dying from treatable diseases due to lack of health insurance. They don't see the folks who jam emergency rooms with non-emergent problems because they don't insurance or a family doctor. They only see their wealthy fat-cat donors and country club buddies, and have nothing but contempt for the rest of society.
First of all, RI Mom, you need to get over your irrational fear of guns. Jeez. You mention it in every friggin' post even when it's not related to the issue at hand.
Secondly, those who say marriage is only a "religious issue" and therefore only Christians should be able to be legally married are ignorant and misinformed. Last time I checked, America is a SECULAR NATION and NOT a theocracy. So there goes your pathetic fundie argument.
My husband and I got married in front of a J.P. My sister and her husband got married the same way. And none of us would have had it any other way. Am I less of a married person because it wasn't done in a church? Give me a break! It's a secular issue and NOT a religious one.
Finally, yes gays are born that way. It's not a choice. Just like me being straight is not a choice. I was BORN that way. What do you tell hermaphrodites? That it was a CHOICE? No. Because it's clear, physically, that they were born that way. Did you know there is a small part of the human race that are born "neuters"? In other words, they are born without sex organs and are asexual.
Did neuters CHOOSE that? Nope. They were born that way. Take a Gender Studies course sometime and get EDUCATED. I have known since I was a wee pre-schooler that I liked boys. Not because I was "taught" to. It was innately in me. My gay friends say the same thing. Love is love is love. It never became more clear to me how important gay marriage rights were until I fell in love with my husband. I thought to myself, "What if I didn't have the right to marry this amazing person because some archaic law told me I couldn't?"
I have two sisters and the one who did get married by a minister is married to a black man. In the 1960's, she wouldn't have been allowed to marry the man she loves. How is that equal? It's not. Live and let live. Stay out of people's bedrooms. I don't like Obama at all but we agree on a couple of things and the legalization of gay marriage across the land is one of them.
An impressive strawman argument, ohwell - but nothing more.
Infanticide is murder. Modern societies sanction some (but only some) forms of murder - as in the case of capitol punishment, self-defense, and war. Three hundred years ago, the murder of witches was sanctioned. Five hundred years ago, the murder of heretics was sanctioned. And so on.
Societies evolve. Human rights expand. Murder becomes less (not more) acceptable. That is the arc of human history. You indulge in reductio ad absurdum - and it is indeed absurd.
amazed,
Heterosexuality is not exactly disease-free, is it? The rest of your rant is, well, amazing.
What was your comment when Obama made a reversal of HIS opinion on gay marriage? Why is it wonderful, amazing, fantastic when a democrat does something, but not when a Republican does it?
@ Sarah
I'm pretty sure most intelligent people know being gay isn't a choice...
Even more intelliegent people know that the ego likes to make us believe we don't have a choice...even when we do.
Our ego's lead us down roads we want to go.
Regardless of my belief that its a choice, I do agree that homosexual rights should be exactly the same as anyone elses.
Just curious if you're a pirate? Kinda sound like something a pirate would say...
Physicist-retired, #1.2- People seem to have lost a lot of ability to read "psycho-dynamics".(I've also heard it referred to as "the dumbing-down of America). All as you say in your post, BUT, the only thing this is really demonstrating, at the "relevant" heart of the matter, is the improper "use" of subjectivity to override "objectivity" in and of being THE LAW. In physics, subjectivity would be the "randomness" in relationship to the established "objectivity", would it not? Same-sex Marriage is the subjectivity in relation to its objectivity, that being "Gay Rights". Gay Rights IS NOT the subjectivity of Same-sex Marriage, it's the objectivity. Gay Rights can only be "objectively", equally protected under the Law by way of Civil Unions.
maridanne i thought i was quit blunt in what i said. maybe to blunt for someone of your intelligence
ivan, NC
Smaller FEDERAL government. There is a difference between Federal and State government. The Federal goverenment was ALWAYS supposed to be small leaving MOST of the legislation up to the individual states. That is the core concept of a republic and is designed to allow people to have more control over how they want to live. That concept fades away more and more as people in one state feel the need to dictate how people on the opposite side of the country live by pushing the federal goverenment to do things it was never intended to do.
Is this not a case of a politician's views on a topic "evolving"? Was there not recently another politician that was praised for this views "evolving" in support of the GLBT community, just in time for an election? At least this politician did not wait until 5 months before he was to be re-elected to make the announcement.
This country has had 12 years out of the last 20 with a Democrat in office of the President, yet in that time it still has not passed a fair law on the issue. Even with the promise that was made this last year, no legislation has been past to my knowledge in the Democrat controlled Senate. And just as has been demonstrated recently no another topic, a filibuster in the Senate does have a limitation if a party does wish to press it.
So if you all really want to be fair on this topic, give Rob Portman as least as much leeway in popular opinion has given another politician on the same topic.
It's rather difficult to demonize someone you love. When we can see the world through the same lenses we afford our children, things become less complicated. At the end of the day, the people we love is what's most important. As my sage daughter has said before: the heart determines love, not society.
rapidrush
I hear a lot of bitching about republicans but perhaps some of you dems can explain why so many BLUE STATES have a ban on same-sex marriage also??? Maybe you guys should spend a little time working out the bigots from your own party before you spend anymore time bitching about the other one. Kinda makes you sound like hypocrites.
I find it funny that people argue about gay being a choice, as if it matters.
WHO CARES!?
I wouldn't know. I'm not gay. And even if I 'chose' to be gay, I'd think I deserve the same basic rights constitutionally for being, you know, human, and an American citizen.
Note that this is about government for me, and not about religion. However, religious people and religious haters both should pay attention to that Portman CHOSE to reflect on a part of the Bible that he thought was more appropriate, called the Golden Rule.
It is called thinking. People have the ability to do it, despite all pretenses they make otherwise.
Backcountry
Here's a thought. Let's try to get EVERYONE to support the rights of others, whether or not they live in a red or a blue state.
Here's another thought. Let's understand that everyone who opposes is not necessarily a bigot. The bigots identify themselves by the hateful things they say about other people.
Here's another thought. Progressives have a history of standing up for the RIGHTS OF OTHER PEOPLE. Conservatives have a history of standing up for THEIR OWN RIGHTS. If you need examples, think about marriage equality and think about gun rights.
Here we go again with the gay thugs..."if you disagree with me, you are ignorant, intolerant, hateful,....because, goddammit, I KNOW I'm right"!
Well, I have as much or more education than most of you, so I'm not ignorant of the facts. I've taken both biology and anatomy. I can see exactly how the bodies of the two different sexes are designed to interact biologically; and homosexuality, while occurring involuntarily, is a divergence from the normal. I do concede that it occurs genetically and involuntarily, but one always has the choice to not act on one's urges!
So according to most of you, homosexuality is not a choice. Do you have the same feelings towards a pedophile or someone who practices beastiality, the murderer or the rapist who says they just had this feeling or need to commit these atrocious crimes from the time they were a child. Where does it stop? Sin is Sin! The bible says none of these will inherit the kingdom of Heaven. Call me a hater if you want to, but I will call it was God calls it. There needs to be repentance. God can change hearts if you are willing. In God's love and mine.
jmsmith asked his doctor that very question about what his rectum was for. the doctor then put his hands on his shoulders and said here let me show you, but i warn you it might hurt a bit the first few times.
The observation that Portman is not the only person who has recently changed his position on this issue is actually a good point. The practical analysis might be that if a Democrat does it, it will [help] get him elected; if a Republican does it, it will leave him in a political no-man's land where the right thinks that he is a traitor and the left thinks that he is a hypocrite.
Not trying to be funny about that... maybe it says something more fundamental about the Republican party than it does about this one person who changed his position.
Damn Sarah, I believe I'm falling in love with you........lol
You haven't explained why they SHOULDN'T act on their urges though!! How is it effecting you!!?? You worry about YOURSELF and THOSE AROUND YOU. Stay out of other peoples bedrooms! That's what you don't get! You guys want smaller government but I guess you want it small enough to fit in everyone's bedrooms huh? There is no law against homosexual sex...so why prevent themselves from doing it? It hurts NO ONE. It interferes with NO ONE ELSE'S RIGHTS. What exactly is your issue with it?
There is a reason the laws are written in the the Bible. There was a reason the US was founded by men who believed in God and put the principles of the Bible into the laws of land. The problem here is that most people don't have the attention span nor the patients to think them through. When will all these misconceptions stop. People go out and kill people all the time. Does that make it right. The ones doing the killing are born to kill, so doesn't that make it right? Where are their rights? If you say it long enough a lie is a lie is lie. I don't hate gay people. I have sympathy for them and I don't condone what they are doing. I don't want them to push their life style on me. No means no. Let them get married. It's between them not us. I could not be in a position to judge like a congressman. It would be against my beliefs on this gay principle alone. Some of you believe this some of you don't. In the end we all shall be judged and where we end up is not our CHOICE then.
ItIsWhat!t!s,
You know being a pedophile is not illegal right? Having sex with a child is, but simply having an attraction to something has not been illegal in the US, ever. Also, since I assume you are talking about child rapists, I do hope you see a difference between consenting adults raping children.
People try to outlaw things they are uncomfortable with, even though it wont affect their lives. Many conservatives have an irrational fear of gay people, so they outlaw it. Many liberals have an irrational fear of guns, so they pass laws to restrain it. Neither do any actual good and never affect them, but they fear what they dont understand and try to make it illegal.
And since everyone seems to be on a republicans are evil bigots circle jerk today, you guys know they dont have the monopoly on it right? Here in California, prop 8 passed (this made gay marriage illegal again). Everyone started blaming the conservatives and mormons, until they looked and found out that the group that supported prop 8 more than any other group and voted against it in greater percentages than most conservative groups was black people. The same black people who voted against gay marriage overwhelmingly also voted for a democrat president 95% of the time. So gay marriage is illegal in one of the most liberal states in the country, mostly because of liberals. Why do you think Obama took so long to come out in favor of gay marriage? The black and Hispanic liberals tend to be against gay marriage.
Hypocrisy is everywhere in politics. How about instead of calling him a hypocrite, we celebrate the fact that we are coming closer to equal rights for gay people in this country.
don97524,
You literally just posted one of the most ignorant and stupid comments I have ever seen.
"Here's another thought. Progressives have a history of standing up for the RIGHTS OF OTHER PEOPLE. Conservatives have a history of standing up for THEIR OWN RIGHTS. If you need examples, think about marriage equality and think about gun rights."
You realize that the republicans supported the civil rights act more than the liberals right? You know republicans freed the slaves? You know George HW Bush passed the a similar act for handicapped people? And conservatives are for gun rights. Liberals are against them. (Painting with a broad stroke I admit) You fit so much wrong in such a small statement.
Gary...yes I do have that same feeling. If people are attracted to animals or small children (both of whom cannot give legal consent) then unfortunately for them they have been born with it. The choice comes in ACTING on it. If they act on it then they should be punished. It against the law, plain and simple. 2 consenting adults are doing nothing against the law though. What's your point gary?
#1.8 - fine, nobody suggested that YOU need to marry a gay guy... but for YOU to set policy for others is just... so 18th century...
Civil rights aren't based on what the bible says. Plain and simple. All religious based arguments are null and void because of that simple fact alone.
don97524
That sure was a long-winded way to say "republicans are bad but democrats are good"
But also let's be sure that everyone knows that republicans are worse. Did you miss this part of my post- "Kinda makes you sound like hypocrites."
Your excuses are utterly pathetic. I don't care if you march down the street decrying gays or if you sneak into a voting booth and do it quietly, either way you are a bigot and are denying the right of someone to live their lives to the fullest. The fact that so many dems don't even have the balls to openly admit they oppose gay marriage hardly puts them on the high ground, it just makes them even bigger cowards. At least the bigots on the right will stand up for what they believe in even if it is ass-backwards.
Change that to "there is nothing preventing blacks and whites from getting married" and you've got the argument for bans on interracial marriage in the 1960's. In a few more years, banning same-sex marriage will seem as bigoted as banning interracial marriage seems today. In the long run, conservatives are on the losing side of history.
I'm thinking this guy is gonna have his CPAC invitation revoked as well. Kudos for him for choosing family over politics. I wonder how many others are afraid to come out for fear it might 'ruin' their parent's political career.
Oh, its OK now; but it wasn't before huh? More Conservative/GOP double talk and hypocrisy. If a situation affects them it is alright. But they get their dimwitted supporters to follow them right over the cliff, but they stop before taking that plunge. Republicans should just stay out of people's bedrooms and sex lives period. Why is it we have freedom of speech, religion and owning guns, but not to do what we want with our own bodies?
WilliamOfRites in 1.0 - who you want to be with is a choice, like it should be. And giving it (marriage or any sort of sharing except the offspings you make) any whatsoever legal status is a violation of individual rights and inviting unnecessary legal issues, divorce settlement being the most common.
Physicist in 1.2 - lawmakers are just as reasonable as the people who vote in - that is to say democracy, as it is now, is good only to blame the inefficiency and corruption back on the very people who suffer because of it
Gary-2595629
I understand that a lot of people fall back on Leviticus 18:23 for their whole "Oh God said it's wrong, check Leviticus, it says man shall not lie with another man." I can understand that.
So my question is, do you treat people with tattoos about the same as you do gay people? After all, Sin is Sin, and Leviticus 19:28 says not to get those.
Just curious, since both are sins. Is one sin worse than another? If people all pay for their sins in the afterlife, why punish them now or ostracize them if it isn't against the law?
why so many BLUE STATES have a ban on same-sex marriage also
Another feint. While gay marriage is not legal in many states there is no ban on them doing so because it has never been tested until now. If you look at any blue state that has effected a ban then look at who controls their house senate and governor when it was enacted and surprise in almost every case you will find Republicans at the core! Take your diversions somewhere people do not know what they are talking about...
Portman is another of those who gladly accepted the right wing evangelical money that was manufactured by hatred for gays and rode it to a senate seat. Now after seeing it up close and personal he like others abdicates his position to suit his not the peoples choice. This is Harley anything that would make me vote for him in the future as it is self gratification not a real effort to face the problem as it should be faced. He should have come out long ago.
Patrik my first instinct is to agree with you but instead of calling names, i think we should be celebrating the changing winds in their party. He's come out for the better albeit for a self reason. Regardless...people evolve their beliefs for whatever reason and I applaud him.
My question is where do the claims of, “You can’t help who you fall in love with” or “It is a civil right” or “Live and let live” or “You are born that way” begin and end? Why is it that your “civil rights” don’t begin until age 18? If “you can’t help who you fall in love with”, why is it not OK for an 18 year old or a 30 year old to marry a 15 year old like they did in the old days or they do in other countries? If “you can’t help who you fall in love with”, why don’t you have the right to have multiple spouses and for your multiple spouses to have multiple spouses? Why is it illegal, grounds for divorce (where half your assets can be taken away from you), and not one of your “civil rights” to have sex with other consenting adults as you see fit? Why is it that you don’t have the right to legally drink alcohol until age 21 in most states? Why do we infringe on adult’s “rights” to have open sex in a bar or some other “adult” establishment? After all, “Live and let live”. Right? Exactly who is it that they are hurting? If “You are born that way” is a good reason to justify one’s behavior, can’t pedophiles and other criminals use that same argument to justify their actions? After all, haven’t there been brain studies to prove that certain traits and characteristics were more likely to lead to certain behaviors? Why is it that we were appalled at the behavior of our “unfaithful” politicians? Don’t Bill Clinton, John Edwards, and the rest of them have “rights”, too? Why does the government make any rules or laws at all that infringe on anyone’s rights? Why do we need to be “governed”? If the claim of “It occurs in nature” is valid, does that mean that man is no better than any other animal? If not, why not just make society like the animal kingdom where the strongest rule and all the animals can do as they please? Why is it that we need laws for the “greater good” of everyone? Why is it that some people scream, “We all have rights” yet in the next sentence, they want to start infringing on your rights guaranteed by the Constitution or make you pay for their rights as they deem appropriate?
Benjamin Franklin was an atheist. Just throwing that out there for those who claim our country was founded on religious principles.
Good for him. He might have been late to the party, but he got there. It may be a bit suspect that he didn't support gay rights fully until his son came out, but isn't that the way for lots of people? Until you experience or understand an issue first hand, it's easy to make judgements. And to you narrow minded fools who liken being gay to pediphilia? GET A GRIP. Gay people are in consentual relationships and to compare it to the rape of a child is disgusting.
That's what kills me about some of these shallow people. Dead set against it unless it's one of your family. That's still just two faced as hell. If his son wasn't gay he would still be running around trashing the gay people. Yup, it's a little different isn't it buddy when it's your own son. It's a real wake up call.
So it's OK for your son to be gay and married but before that it wasn't OK for anyone else????? Of course you have changed your mind but only because you felt you had to, not because you really believe in it.
Backcountry,
These states ban same-sex marriage:
Oregon and California can safely be described as 'blue' - and those bans are more than a bit of a surprise. But still, 2 'blue' states have bans. Two.
The bans in those states are the result of a ballot question - and one should consider the many millions of dollars spent during those campaigns by the Mormon Church and the Defense of Marriage Foundation. Neither is exactly known to be 'liberal'.
At the same time, these states permit same-sex marriage:
I personally see a trend, don't you?
Mr Burns (#1.116)
When civil rights were legislated a half century ago there were conservatives and liberals in both the Democratic and Republican parties. That is no longer true. When civil rights became law, conservatives fled the Democratic party in droves, many becoming Dixiecrats (following Strom Thurmond) on their way to the Republican party. The Republicans then continued to fight against integration, bussing, the Martin Luther King holiday and, in short, were on the wrong side of virtually every race issue for many years.
This is not about Republicans and Democrats .... the party platforms have changed drastically in the past five or six decades. This is about conservatives and progressives. There are damn few progressives anymore in the Republican party and Lincoln would have been ashamed of what his Republican Party became in the 1950's and 60's. (I don't believe he would be very happy with them today either)
IT IS RIDICULOUS FOR THE CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS TODAY TO CLAIM THE CIVIL RIGHTS VICTORIES THAT WERE AIDED BY THE PROGRESSIVE REPUBLICANS OF THE PAST.
Typical POS politician...turning his "deeply held" convictions until they are inconvenient...I don't care what political leaning they are (I oppose gay marriage even if one of my children were gay)...if you take a stand you would think that the person would have thought about the issue, investigated both sides and looked into thenselves to see how they feel before taking a stand...having a family member being gay should not make a difference...if his kid turned to the mob he would think organized crime is OK as well? not bullsh*t congressmen or women.
Physicist:
You didn't include Iowa in the gay marriage list - although the state supreme court made that ruling and the congress won't let it come to a vote...typical politics again...they know it would be voted down...
You realize that the republicans supported the civil rights act more than the liberals right? You know republicans freed the slaves?
Nonsense the civil rights movement in the 60's started in the northern blue states and ran into opposition with the then southern Democrats called the Dixiecrats who are all now republicans since Strom Thurmond left the party and became a republican. Republicans did not free the slaves cause there were none back then Lincoln started the republican party as opposition to again the southern democrats who were always a minority in the Democratic party and against the then republicans because of the civil war they lost. Comparing todays democrats and republicans to the ones back then is stupid. Also if you remember LBJ was the driving force behind the civil right bill that passed and he was ....A democrat.
Dennis,
Hilarious. I wonder if Wikipedia can be used in a court of law to excuse illegal behavior. LOL! Wikipedia LOL.
All this bull about whether states do or do not recognize same sex marriages is a lot of bull. Just because they do not have a law on the books saying they approve of it does not mean they ban it!. Here is a link for a more up to date look at where each state is in the evolution to recognizing this feature.
lambdalegal.org /states-regions
Take out the spaces
I squarely blame the Senator. Obviously he didn't pray hard enough for God to take the gay away.
Concerned,
Well that's not true. Civil rights are afforded to children also, but because of their mental capacity some of them are more limited than those that are afforded adults. As for the age, I'm fairly sure that has Socratic origins.
Because 15 year olds don't have legal capacity for informed consent. That's the same reason they can't get mortgages either. If you don't understand WHY that is, I can't help you.
You would have to take that up on another vine, considering Polygamy has nothing to do with gay marriage. As one is about the gender of a contracting party and one is about the number of parties in a contract. The quickest way to address this question is for you to ask yourself this...
Why doesn't straight marriage lead to Polygamy?
It is and you can. Anything can be grounds for divorce. It's your spouses decision what to leave you for, not the government's. I believe the term would be "Having your cake and eating it too".
Public health and safety.
No, because criminal actions and pedophilia infringe on the rights of others.
Yeah, that's why none of them went to jail for having sex outside their marriages.
I don't think you understand what a "right" is.
Because we have frontal lobes.
I don't know, ask the anti-equality crowd.
Why is it your post was so freaking asinine?
Physicist-retired,
Prop 8 passed in California due to the black vote. Conservatives dont have a monopoly on homophobia.
And to the brain dead people who believe republicans and democrats have switched, there is absolutely nothing that supports what you are saying. Hell, even the Westboro Baptist Church supports rights for minorities, and believe racism to be against God. Republicans were very against racism. Your liberal leaders may have tricked you into thinking they are for the black man, but we are not all that stupid.
Why didnt portman just take his kid the clinic Bachman runs .. the kid would have been cured and the GOP could then make the case that all homos just choose to be that way .. Bacnman could have saved Portmans career
Having the states decide whether each state would recognize gay rights is the most important statement in the article (Rubino). State decisions in what should be common law is a dangerous practice, in my humble opinion. The GOP constantly promotes each state to make such decisions. We are The United States of America not The Divided States of America.
Physicist-retired:
To many ultraconservatives, "empathy" is a dirty word. Showing empathy for other human beings is a sign of weakness for them. President Obama was viciously attacked for saying he wanted to appoint a Supreme Court justice who had "empathy" prior to Sonya Sotomayor's nomination. Obama also said he wanted a justice with "respect for the rule of law" in the very same sentence, but the right wing media edited that part of the sentence out of the video they showed. But the habit of dishonestly editing video is another common rightwing habit than what's being discussed here.
How pathetic can you be? Sir, your son is disease stricken and that is how he will die. Homosexuality is a disease, a naturally occurring one, but a disease nonetheless. Yes, some animals are gay, that’s a fact; here's another fact, when animals are gay, they are shunned, they live a life of solitude, they are not able/allowed to breed or raise young, and then they die, and all of this happens so that their gay "genes"' are not passed on to the next generation; it's evolution 101. You gays should be able to appreciate that seeing as how you don't believe in God. That is a perfectly logical and reasonable argument that leaves God and morality completely out of it. Try thinking about it this way... millions of people have AIDS or cancer or what-have-you, take your choice of diseases but I'll use AIDS since it goes hand-in-hand with being gay; many of these diseases are incurable and people have no choice but to live with it and spend their lives trying to overcome it. We do not try to spread these diseases in mass production, no sir, we try to eradicate them. What makes your son so special that you would support his disease? You can support your son without supporting his disease. You have previously said so yourself that you do not support same sex marriage but now you find out that your son is a flamer and all of a sudden you change you mind? You selfish, pathetic, hypocrite; you are now classified as a liberal. Follow this link: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/ ...your son is at a much higher risk of contracting AIDS due to his homosexuality. Do you support that sir? If he contracts AIDS will you change your mind about AIDS too and support that disease as well? I understand that this is hard for you to accept and that you are probably having some difficulty dealing with your son's situation but you need to stop thinking and acting like a liberal; leave your emotions out of the equation, you're letting them get the best of you, that is what liberals do. Before you found out your son was gay you were able to think reasonably, rationally, and logically about the idea of homosexuality; you were not emotionally involved. After you found out your son was gay you changed your mind all of a sudden...why? What changed? You knew before that homosexuality exists, that it's real. So why the change in heart? Were you a heartless prick before and are now all of sudden full of compassion? No sir, I'll tell you what changed...you got emotionally involved and let your emotions get the best of you. That is what liberals do; the whole basis of liberalism is predicated on one simple idea...emotion. Liberals prey on the emotions of their supporters; they find whatever emotions they can and exploit those emotions to push their agenda. Every single liberal agenda is pushed in this fashion. They find a victim and the exploit that victim by preying on the emotions that are caused by that victim's situation. Think about it, every liberal agenda has a victim as it's centerpoint, gun control, immigration, tax hikes, healthcare, prochoice, and so on.
Physicist-retired
You need to recheck your facts if you think those are the only states with some sort of ban against same sex marriage. Aside form that you've done nothing to disprove my point. Talking about how much worse the republicans are is a lame attempt to draw attention away from the hypocrisy on the other side. We all know the republican platform is opposed, that doesn't mean that there aren't a whole lot of dems sitting back and letting the republicans take all of the heat for something they'll vote for also.
Most of my life I've been opposed to Gay Marriage, until a few years ago I would be yelling at the top of my lungs at Portman. I have come to realize that I believe in the same freedoms for all Americans, but I limited those freedoms to those I thought were right. Our Constitution doesn't include anything about marriage, but it does guarantee the same rights to all citizens. That's good enough for me. As to whether it is a sin or not, I don't wish to comment, since I am a believer in the Bible. It is something I struggle with. Since I'm not GOD I will leave that question for Him to judge. I believe what Christ said to love all as we love ourselves. Congrats Mr. Portman you have broken with pack to be your own man on this contentious issue. Bravo for you. Now how about standing tall for the other issues your party has difficulty understanding.
stop please-1605106
WRONG!!! We are the REPUBLIC of the United STATES of America. Take a minute to learn about what exactly a republic is before you make any claims about how our country should be run. What you call a "dangerous practice" is the very foundation our country was built upon!
Complete bs! Homosexuality is a perverse choice and nothing else! This has always been the findings by Doctors until recent times. Because of force or fear of losing their jobs, they have changed their tune. Complete crap! Homosexuality wasn't even heard of in the community I was raised in until of late. The gay culture has been on a complete society and political push to put this into every community around our country. From the disgusting porn on the internet to the constant push in the media. I don't care who you have sex with, but stop pushing the sh*t on our youth!
@Physicist-Retired,
I just have to say, as a fellow scientist (I have a PhD in Chemical Engineering), and after reading your posts for several years now, that...
You sir...
ARE AWESOME!
{/stand, /clap}
Keep up the good work, it's always a joy to read informed, well-written posts on the vine. They are few and far between.
Really, Physicist-Retired? You think that because something occurs naturally in the animal kingdom that it should be acceptable for humans? Many animals eat their young, female preying mantises eat their mates, and dogs lick their butts. This is natural behavior and many animals can be observed engaging in these behaviors. Do You?
And you can say all you want to the person who brought up infanticide that we don't do that because it is murder. Doesn't matter. You are advocating that because a behavior occurs in the animal kingdom naturally that said behavior should also be natural for humans. Or is it just those behaviors that back up what you already believe?
jmsmith
In your case, talking out of!
Sure, a man makes a decision to have sex with another man. Sure, that's a choice. But, if I have sex with my wife, that's also a choice. The attraction part of it, no that's not a choice.
MSNBCMFE said: "The Party of Irrelephant continues to amaze." You got that right, right!
Anyone in the "Right-Wing(nuts) that hopes for half a chance to win ANYTHING, would be wise to cut away from the noxious virulent umbilical cord of the "Party." Here are a few reasons why:
The illumination of the GOP brought to you by their very own "Weapons of Mass Frustration":
Lyin' Ryan - "Rape is only a method of conception."
The "I Am Stupid Mitt World Tour"
"Soup Kitchen" Ryan
Jack Welch - "Those Chicago guys..."
Allen West - Communist's!
Paul Ryan and Todd Akin- Legitimate Rape
John Sununu - Colin Powell's "Race Card" endorsement
Richard Mourdock - "Rape is God's will"
Big Bird Mitt
Rick Santelli - the Teabag wizard
"Therapy Horse" Mitt
Paul Broun - "Evolution is a lie from the pit of he!!"
the donald - the GOP "kindly" told him to STFU. Humpty-Trump had to "Fire Himself."
Sarah Palin - Nuff said
"Binders Full of Women" Mitt
Steve King - Gloats about his bill to "allow animal torture"
"Cayman Islands" Mitt
Willard Romney - The 47% of Americans feel they are entitled
Rush Limbaugh / Sean Hannity - Everything that spews from their mouths
Flip-Flop Mitt
Freeport, Illinois better known as "BAINPort" Illinois to the people losing their jobs to China
"No Tax" Mitt
Grover Norquist - Obama won because Romney's a "Poopy Head."
"Whining Mitt" - Obama won because of "gifts" to youths and minorities
Amazedandalarmed---are you actually serious??? I don't know how long you have been a walking, talking, sentient adult, but have you ever actually seen two clad or unclad gay men indulging in sexual activity on, say, a park bench, on a lawn, in a hallway, on the subway, on a bus, on a plane, on a rooftop, in the middle of the street or anywhere else in full view of your eyes? I have been around a while, and I NEVER HAVE. There would be a helluva lot less chance of that happening than your seeing two hot-blooded high school seniors necking, groping and pawing each other with legs wrapped around each other in any of those same places in full view of any man, womAn OR CHILD walking by. But that would make it okay for your child to see, right? I think the gay community would have a lot more class than those high school seniors. Good grief.
"Republican Senator Rob Portman has announced his support for same-sex marriage, saying he reversed his position on the divisive social issue after his son came out as gay."
Translation: "If my son were straight, I would still B against same-sex marriage."
Where U stand on an issue depends on where U sit.
Ebeneser Howard
Medical science has proven homosexuality is NOT a disease. But bigotry is a disease, and it's a disease nobody was born with. It is culturally acquired. Fortunately, it's a disease that can be cured, as Sen. Portman has shown.
JESUM CROW!!!! Open the floodgates! THANK YOU, Mr. Portman! reductio ad REALITY! How many of these Congresspeople also have a Family Member, never mind just a casual Acquaintance, that's being repeatedly and continuously raped by forced "bend over and take it" tactics every time they "have to" put price-gouged gas in their car so they can excercise their Right-to-work in Big Oil's Congressionally Loophole-Monopolized Economy so Big Oil can have their Subsidies? (just to name one example....but keep it going, please)
Well, actually, it isn't illegal to have sex outside of marriage. Walk into any police station, announce that you're an adulterer and see what happens. Nothing.
Jamie-2626566
I could posit that the reason that the findings always said it was perverse was for them to keep their jobs in the past.
If it's a perverse choice, perhaps you can detail the time you made the "choice" to be straight. Did you have to weigh any pros and cons?
I didn't get to make that choice, I was born straight. But if you're so convinced it was a choice to be gay, then I might assume you made the choice to be straight. Care to provide how you reached your conclusion?
Thanks.
@Jamie
Even IF that is true (I don't completely buy it), science moves on and we learn more about how our bodies and mind work as it does. 'Doctors' have been wrong about thousands (probably millions) of things in the past.
Got any proof of that?
So? That just means it's becoming more acceptable. Many people hid their true feelings, which is why you wouldn't have known about it. I only found out my cousin is gay a year or 2 ago. She didn't want the whole family to know because she was worried how some members of it would react. That happened to be my grandparents. Since they died she 'came out'.
No they've not.
Because porn is all the fault of gay people? It's all created by them? There was none before you started to notice gay people exist? Hugh Heffner is really gay?
You clearly do.
"Walk into any police station, announce that you're an adulterer and see what happens. Nothing."
(snicker)
"But if you're so convinced it was a choice to be gay, then I might assume you made the choice to be straight. Care to provide how you reached your conclusion?"
(whispers) Her child hasn't come out yet.
;-)
"Hugh Heffner is really gay?"
LOL!
How do blacks control the vote in CA, Mr. Burns? They are, after all, only 6% of that state's population, and the split between the black vote was 49% for, 43% against (almost within the margin of error).
Voters 65 and older showed strong support for Prop. 8, while people in California's coastal regions strongly opposed the measure, 54% to 39%.
Latino voters were almost evenly, 46% to 48%.
So to recap, elderly and rural inland populations (not exactly liberal strongholds, are they?) passed the measure.
Source.
African Americans don't control the vote in CA. That's ludicrous.
DrowningGrover,
Thanks. Always nice to see a fellow scientist on the Vine.
I'm married to a bio-organic chemist. I tried to tell a joke about helium at dinner last night, but there was no reaction ;-)
DJLM,
Already addressed in #1.97 above. And the reductio becomes even more absurdum.
♪♫What else should I be? All apologies.
What else could I say? Everyone is gay.
What else could I write? I don't have the right.
What else should I be? All apologies.♪♫
Whether being LGBT is a choice or natural or not is beside the point. Any law banning the legal marriage of anyone over 18 with mental capacity is against Civil Rights and should be seen as unconstitutional. It is point blank discrimination to alienate a minority of people by withholding rights.
Starstrz, you must oppose gun control too then? And un-authorized drone strikes against American citizens?
/smile
That reminds me, and is almost as bad as:
what's the Pirate captains favorite chemical element?
ARRRRgon
(Ah, it's fun to tell chemistry jokes, PERIODICALLY!!!)
@Ebeneser:
I don't see how restricting marriage to the straight majority correlates with gun control laws.
DJLM
If you only bothered to read the comment you would realize that no one is advocating we act like animals. It is simply a rebuttal to those who say homosexuality is not natural.
Get your head out of your ass, cause THAT for sure is unnatural.
While this is a good thing that Sen. Portman is coming out in support of marriage equality, I still feel it is a little low value on this considering it took someone near and dear to him to come out, as for the senator take this up and support it. As everyone should in this country, by the grace of the US Constitution giving *all* of us the same civil rights, and for this lawmaker, it should have been a no-brainer for him from the start and the rest of congress against this issue as well. Hopefully this begins a wonderful trend to do the right (Constitutional) thing.
On another topic, this regarding stricter guns laws; will it take the death of a child by an assault weapon, who is the child of a staunch gun rights congressional member, to have a change of heart in the sense that Sen. Portman now has for marriage equality? They should think about now, consdiering most of the republicans still haven't gotten what Sandy Hook has meant tom them as it does so far for a vast majority of Americans. It amazes the lack of critical think or the facets of what these issues mean. That lack of in-depth thinking was on blatant display by Sen Ted Cruz when lecturing Sen. Diane Feinstein on the Constitution yesterday.
...
...
...
Well yah, there's your problem. You expect too much.
I'm not sure what was worse. The childish, immature, belittling question from Sen. Cruz, or the fact that his supporters (and others of his ilk) actually think that's a good "Gotcha" question.
There is absolutely nothing natural about homosexuality, but if it makes you happy? Go for it!
I recognize this is an entirely useless endeavor because people aren't interested in facts so much as they interested in selectively using information to support a position they already believe in, but here goes anyway.
The "unnatural" argument is not an argument against homosexuality or gay marriage for several reasons.
1.) There is nothing that suggest homosexual behavior is "unnatural." We see homosexual behavior in a wide variety of species. We see asexual behavior in species. There are species in which entire swaths of the population don't even reproduce (for example, bees). There are species in which members of the species actually change their sex to reproduce. There is no evidence to support the idea that the only "natural" sexual behavior is one male and one female mating. The evidence against that is so overwhelming, anyone espousing that belief is literally ignoring facts. There's no two ways about it -- if someone is claiming that homosexual behavior is unnatural they are demonstrating that they have zero interest in facts.
Corrollary to 1: Inevitably, someone will respond with "well, does that mean if animals do it, we should do it? Animals kill their young, should we kill our young?" If this is your response, you're missing the point of my argument. I am nowhere suggesting that if animals do something that means we should automatically do something. All I'm doing is providing evidence against the idea that a male-female coupling is the only "natural" way species engage in sexual behavior.
2.) Whether something is natural or not is irrelevant to it's moral "rightness" or "wrongness." Believing that the "naturalness" of something makes it automatically right or wrong is called the "naturalistic fallacy." I can give plenty of examples of things that are natural that we would consider bad or good.
Infanticide is a behavior seen in nature (and thus "natural") but I think we can all agree that infanticide is morally wrong.
Communal behavior is seen in plenty of species (and thus "natural"). And I think most of us would agree that helping others is a morally good thing.
I can also point to "unnatural" things that are good and bad.
Cars are not natural -- but they are good in that they help us to travel and accomplish many things we would otherwise not be able to do.
Cars can also be bad -- they lead to accidents, drunk driving, wear and tear on the environment, etc.
These are a few example, but I know ALL of us can think of good and bad things that are natural and unnatural. Thus, we should all be able to recognize that the "naturalness" of something does not make something automatically morally right or morally wrong.
Thus, no matter how you cut it, the "naturalness" of homosexuality is irrelevant to the argument. Let it go. If you continue to use that argument, it merely suggests that you have no interest in facts and no real arguments to support your position. Of course, you can continue to deliver the argument. But just understand that it undermines any credibility you might have.
There is absolutely nothing relevant about your personal opinion, but if it makes you happy? Go for it!
Bryan
If you are going to question the fact that homosexuality is "natural" I would like you to reveal when you chose to be heterosexual.
You can sneer at others and be flippant if that is what makes you happy, but sexual orientation is not about being happy .... it is about what comes natural.
@Ebeneser, a clarifying question:
"Yes, some animals are gay, that’s a fact; here's another fact, when animals are gay, they are shunned, they live a life of solitude, they are not able/allowed to breed or raise young, and then they die, and all of this happens so that their gay "genes"' are not passed on to the next generation; it's evolution 101."
By your argument if gays had not been FORCED 2 live a straight lifestyle, they wouldn't have passed on the "gay" gene & we would have no gays today.......because they would have died off.
Am I understanding U correctly?
At least this guy had a better reason for his reversal than Biden's excuse for his - watching a few episodes of Will & Grace.
Sarah-3043284
"Well that's not true. Civil rights are afforded to children also, but because of their mental capacity some of them are more limited than those that are afforded adults. As for the age, I'm fairly sure that has Socratic origins. 15 year olds don't have legal capacity for informed consent. That's the same reason they can't get mortgages either. If you don't understand WHY that is, I can't help you."
Why does the government decide that the appropriate age for "mental capacity" or "legal capacity" is 18 when studies show that the brain is not fully developed until around age 30?
"Polygamy has nothing to do with gay marriage. As one is about the gender of a contracting party and one is about the number of parties in a contract."
True, but why is one deemed to be acceptable and one is not? Why doesn't the argument to justify gay marriage also apply to justifying polygamy? Shouldn't ALL spouses be granted the same rights as ONE spouse? Why would you want to limit the rights to only one spouse?
"Public health and safety."
If an 18 year old is determined to have the "mental capacity" to enter into a binding contract, why do you and the government think that they don't have the "mental and legal capacity" to drink responsibly? They have the "mental capacity" to purchase a gun, but they don't have the "mental capacity" to purchase alcohol? Also, how exactly do two consenting adults performing sex acts in the corner of a bar jeopardize public health and safety any more than most public restrooms.
"Criminal actions and pedophilia infringe on the rights of others."
Yes, they do and I don't mind footing the bill to lock them up. However, if I am forced to pay for something that conflicts with my religious beliefs which are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, how exactly does that not "infringe on the rights of others"?
Regarding Bill Clinton, John Edwards, and other politicians, are you saying that you condone and support their behavior or were you appalled like the rest of the country with "mental capacity"?
I don't think you understand what a "right" is.
Well, I can at least read them right there in the Bill of Rights and amendments. #1 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. #2 A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
"Because we have frontal lobes. I don't know, ask the anti-equality crowd. Why is it your post was so freaking asinine?"
Well, Miss Anti-Equality, what exactly is your position on the proposed legislation that infringes on MY right to religious freedom, MY right to bear arms, or MY right to Due Process? My post was asinine because I am tired of having MY rights granted by our Constitution infringed upon and people using selective rhetoric that they only want applied to get what they want. Why are your rights more imporatnt than mine? What happened to EQUALITY and rights for all?
Ebeneser,
Animals who engage in homosexual behavior are not shunned in all species. For example, bonobos engage in homosexual behavior regularly as a means to create coalitions and support. And they are not shunned by others in species. In fact, those who have engaged in more homosexual behavior tend to do better because they have created more positive relationships with others in their group and will garner more support when they are in need of help. Please actually research what you're talking about.
Has GOD changed HIS stance on gay marriage??
Not in tens of thousands of years!
U don't say-3994780
That was my read. If it's a gene, then why are all of these straight people passing it on. Is it a recessive gene, like albinism?
I figured gay animals didn't breed because... well, you know. Lack of required equipment. Unless they're bi-sexual animals, at which point I guess they could pass it on. Maybe that's how the "gay" gene gets passed along?
Do we know which "gene" this is? We've made some pretty good advances regarding mapping human genes. Maybe the Human Genome Project can find the gay gene for us?
William Travis-7825503
Can you tell me if he changed his stance on tattoos?
It's a few pages back from where he says Man shall not lie with another man. I can't tell if he's changed his opinion on any of it, but you seem to have a direct link.
Please advise, thanks!
concernedamerica,
So, if someone's religious belief is that all killing is wrong, should they not have to pay taxes to support the military? Should the military itself be illegal because it might conflict with someone's religious beliefs? Just curious.
Siobhan27, that is also covered in the Constitution. Perhaps you should go read it for yourself. My tax dollars pay for many things that I do not like, but I comply with the law.
Wow, now this is important news!! NOT!! As if this is the first Republican on this earth that supports same sex marriage. I don't, does Cheney ring a bell! Do we not have more pressing issues to deal with in this country other than who supports or doesn't support same sex marriage. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and those opinions regardless or whether you agree or not should be respected. But this isn't news.
ConcernedAmerica,
You haven't answered the question.
Your arguments appears to be that if your religious beliefs conflict with something, you shouldn't have to pay taxes toward it -- otherwise it is infringing on your religious rights. However, if you apply that to other situations, that position is untenable.
If you don't like my example, here's another:
There are religions that believe that blood transfusions are morally wrong. Should that mean they should not have to pay taxes (such as to Medicare or Medicaid) toward a medical system that does blood transfusion? Should blood transfusions be illegal for everyone because it conflicts with someone's religious beliefs?
Repojam:
That's actually a good question. You must remember that you only have temporary use of your body which actually belongs to God. You are not supposed to use it like a billboard!
Like all the stuff you think you own. It ain't really yours. it all belongs to God!
I remember a minister saying, "I've attended hundreds of funerals and as I watch the hearse go by, I've never seen a U-Haul riding behind one. You leave it all behind!
concernedamerica
Aside from the useless non-sequitur screed to the reasonable answers Sarah gave you, this last paragraph of yours takes the cake. After all of your questions answered, you somehow summarize that your rights are being infringed upon due to gay marriage (jeez I don't like that term, it should just be marriage, like for everyone). As I mentioned in my previous post, something regarding "the lack critical thinking". How in the hell are your rights being infringed upon?
Kudo's to Mr Portman to change his mind after knowing his son for his entire 21 year old life, and apparently finding him the same measure of a man as anyone else, and to be entitled to the same rights to marry(with all the good and bad things a heterosexual couple endure), to understand that love is love, regardless of what sexes are involved, so long as they're adults. Mr Portman, like many parents who love their kids dearly, simply found out something new about his son. Nothing more, nothing less.
The wording in many states that trips up especially the GOP is "between one man and one woman". Anybody ever stop and think that may be worded like that to keep some religious sects from having multiple wives/husbands, and has absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage at all, especially when there's a definitive number involved in the sentence? Hmmm
We've got several states now that allow same sex marriage, and the sky hasn't fallen yet, except for the Catholic Church, child molestation isn't up, which is mostly a heterosexual thing by fact anyway, the economies in those states have probably seen a small boom in their respective states economies because of weddings, buying things to set up a new household besides just the buying of a house,(gay people btw, tend to have more disposable income than most other groups...just something for opposition states to chew on), gay boy scouts have made the leaders at least agree that a gay scout can achieve each and everything a straight scout can....except get his duly earned Eagle Scout badge which the BSA cheats him out of, because of paranoia of someone in the troop being gay is somehow contagious(please step into the 21st century), and now most recently a poll, to adults, NOT the scouts themselves, is it permissible and safe, for a straight and gay scout to share a tent?? How ridiculous. Is it ok for your son to shower after phys ed? Geez....somebody might see his penis, if he's not lookin' around with darting eyes himself. Get over it, leave the church out of gay marriage and all this other craziness. Being gay isn't contagious, but ignorance and stupidity certainly can be, and I'm glad to see a generation growing up, where to them, it doesn't matter(keywords...growing up). A lot of so called adults should try it sometime, and you might find out that MANY of the people that work as police officers, firefighters, EMTs, Dr's, etc., are gay. Not to mention the men and women in military uniforms that also risk being killed in the line of their duty everyday too. If and when you need their help,(and eventually you will need one or more) are you gonna ask their sexual preference before you allow them to help you? I doubt it. You'll take the help and be damned grateful they were there, and didn't ask or care what YOUR sexual preference was. Again, kudos to Mr Portman for finally seeing the light, and to your son for having a father that finally put all his misunderstood pieces of just one of the many puzzles we call life together.
Concerned,
I told you, I believe it's Socratic in nature and has been in place prior to modern brain technology and knowledge. Personally, I think the age of consent for EVERYTHING should be 25. Write your congress person, I guess. Otherwise I really don't get what point you're trying to prove by harping on this?
Can you quote where I said I'M against Polygamy? However I AM against strawman arguments. If I wanted to discuss the illegality and reasoning behind polygamy I'd go find an article about it.
Uh, did somebody ask you to pay for their gay wedding or something?
I could care less who they sleep with. It's none of my business.
Well first you would have to show/tell me how any of those rights are being infringed upon.
Can you quote where I said I agree with the drinking age and legal consent age.
Dude, this is a piss poor attempt that's boiling down to nothing but irrelevant topics, strawman arguments, and stumbling shots in the dark at trying to discredit me by assuming positions you have no reason to believe I hold. What the hell are you even getting at here, seriously you don't even make sense.
Pathetic, really.
JMagnum, You missed one of my favorites
Michelle Bachmann, Well, It's hard to pick a favorite out of this treasure chest of malaprops and just dumbness.
Physicist-retired,
You give me one of the most biased news sources possible, with a pre-vote questionair, and dont know that it passed by only couple percentage points, and you expect me to take you as credible???
GA Repojam.
I'm not trying 2 pick a fight with U, Ebeneser. Just asking U 2 clarify.....
Am I understanding U correctly?
@concerned although you defended yourself well, i would bypass arguments with Sarah. She babbles too much. there are many other intelligent people who disagree with your point of view that will offer a more insightful conversation. Everything ends with some snivelling comment with her
First of all, if we are ALL created in God's image--then God is both a Woman and a Man; God just IS; not some Gandalf looking old man with long white hair and a beard.
Second, GOD didn't say anything about homosexuality--MAN said that God said it was a sin. Man said that God said A LOT of things: "...that we should love one another as ourselves"; or was it, "...do unto other's as you would have other's do unto you"?
Third, human sexuality is more than just a man and woman copulating to procreate the species. Most have sex for "fun" than to reproduce. What goes on between two (or more) consenting adults and between adults, is their business. A "Union" of marriage is between two people--sexual preference doesn't change the meaning to those who wish to spend their lives together, no matter how brief the vow(s) may be--divorce rate is on the rise, and by the way, those divorce rate numbers are of the "Man-Woman" unions.
concerned (but not concerned enough about others' rights)
You have taken a very conservative position ..... you are very concerned about your own rights and ONLY your own rights and are very willing to block the rights of others. I don't know whether or not Sarah is gay .... it doesn't matter. I am not gay and I am very much in favor of marriage equality.
This points out a major difference between conservatives and progressives. You selfishly focus your attention on YOUR RIGHTS. Progressives stand for the rights of others.
Conservatives blocked women's right to vote. Progressive men listened to progressive women and voted in their favor.
Conservatives blocked civil rights. Progressive whites listened to freedom fighters and voted in favor of full rights for minorities.
Conservatives are blocking marriage equality and straight progressives are standing with homosexual citizens to fight for their rights. Conservatives are on the wrong side of yet another issue and they will lose ..... again.
Small business owners? Like all those small WEDDING BUSINESS owners?
Considering the recent report that listed the average wedding cost at $28k, that is A LOT of potential money for the small business owners in that industry.
The "Dems" want to help these small businesses by giving them MORE customers and MORE revenue, at an average of $28k a pop. While YOU and the republicans want to limit their potential customers, and thus potential revenue and profits. Where the F*** is YOUR empathy for them? YOU are withholding potential profits from small business owners.
@ohwell, thank you for your words of wisdom. I realized that quickly once I saw that she could not even empathize with or have any compassion for Elizabeth Edwards or Hillary Clinton. "I could care less". WOW!
@Don, right back at you. Your drivel makes it clear that you do not care about my rights under the Constitution, only yours. Drone attacks on American citizens? Infringing on the right to bear arms? The economy is in the tank, the debt is going up, and all you want is to increase government spending on benefits. I say cut ALL benefits for marriage. We can't afford them!
Wow !!! everyone knows how to write a book when it comes with Gay's rights .
My question to this topic is : How sure can you be at the age of 21 that you are gay ,especially with this strict family values and book worm (Yale undergrad)that he was brought up .
Second is: What if a women turns him around ,do not tell me it didn't hapened and also many have thought about having children of their own and changed .
Than where is father's point of view ,He claims he is a christian ?I do not believe so .You cannot change your view on God just because your child wants you so .You can still love him anconditionaly .
concernedamerica
Which "proposed legislation" is stopping you from practicing your religion? I have not heard of any legislation that prevents you from attending church on Sunday, reading your bible, or praying at your bedside. Please link the proposed legislation that outlaws all these activities.
Which "proposed legislation" is calling for a ban on ALL guns? I still own a handgun, and I have not seen a piece of legislation that will ban it. Please link the bill in Congress that you are referring to.
@mguy, you forgot the part about "shall not be infringed". Webster defines infringed as "to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another". Webster defines encroached as "to enter by gradual steps or by stealth into the possessions or rights of another". Why is it OK to infringe upon teh rights of the American citizens? Go read the Bill of Rights. Why do you think it is OK to expand your rights and limit those rights already specifically granted to American citizens by people much smarter than you and I?
"Portman’s 21-year-old son Will, who is a junior at Yale University, discussed his sexual orientation with Portman and his wife"
oh, lol, so HE himself is remarried then? typical gop hypocrisy.. wouldnt want his son f-n up the sanctity of marriage or nuthin'.
tell us what YOUR god said!!!!
yes, if only every single republican could just have a gay child the world could finally learn to accept each other like jesus demanded.
bambi
Were you straight at the age of 21? "How sure can you be"?
I knew that I was straight at the age of 21. I am sorry you were confused about your sexuality.
I want you to look something up for me, it's a word spelled "GRAMMAR".
One last thing: "anconditionaly" Really? Well, at least you live up to your name.
please tell us of the passage where jesus condemns homosexuality! id just LOVE to hear it!
tell us how you stoned your kids and wife for talking back, cause if you have them, they did and have, and you did NOT stone them! so if you wanna compare your deuteronomy or leviticus to your own life, we are all waiting with open ears!
shelfish anyone?
if homosexuality is unattural and a disease, then christianity is an EPIDEMIC!
This is the way it is, not my opinion but fact (though the bigots will say otherwise).
There is only one reason anyone can be against equal rights to all people, and that is FALSE religious beliefs.
If you are a true christian (a person that believes Jesus was the son of god and try to live their lives by his example) than, a.) you are not to judge others, for that is left to god.b.) you are to hate the sin and not the sinner. c.) love they neighbor (your fellow man) as u would your own.
Those are just a few of the things Jesus and the bible teach us, in regards on how we should act and treat each other, now the bigots can point to 1 maybe 2 short verses in the bible that can be twisted to say being gay is such a horrible sin, but there is still not a single verse that says u should hate your fellow man for being gay, that you must make them a second class citizen and to treat them worse than you would a dog on the street..... No that all comes from evil men (and women) who claim to be holly yet they don't even know the teachings of Jesus.
If you still cant see that you are wrong maybe you should convert to radical islam because surely your views align more with those nut jobs then they do our lord and savior Jesus Christ....
OhWell,
I'm sorry you can't keep up. But really, that's not my fault.
Concerned,
We're still waiting for HOW your rights are being infringed. You do know the word HOW implies more than a definition, right? And yes, I really couldn't care less about what goes on in the marriages of strangers. You'd do well to learn how to mind your own business too.
george pauljohn (#1.3)
HOLY FEDERALISM BATMAN!!!!
I think this may be the first time I ever agree with you GPJ!
Marriage is a state mandated issue. Not a word is mentioned in the Constitution about marriage, civil unions or other partnerships. The Tenth Amendment does however implicity apply, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Marriage is not commerce, war, or taxation. It is unrelated to money, the post office, the patent system, or any of the other enumerated powers of the federal government. Its regulation is neither necessary nor proper in pursuit of those powers.
The Framer’s had no desire to settle such matters, and they did not wish a future Congress to do so either. The Constitution they wrote left only two choices. Either allow the states to regulate marriage, with, perhaps, federal consequences to follow, or else return marriage to the people, to individuals, families, churches, and communities. Either approach would be consistent with the Constitution.
Just as Congress can’t prohibit same sex marriage, it must be concluded that Congress can’t establish it, either. The only way to allow the Federal government to have this authority is by simply amending the Constitution as it defines. Whether the states must all recognize same sex marriages as a matter of civil rights law, unrelated to the 10th Amendment, is a question the Supreme Court may soon address. This is the beauty of our system of “checks-and-balances” and must be adhered too.
Our Federal government has enough problems abiding to its mandated responsibilities such as creating an effective and responsible budget, maintaining a prosperous and sustainable economy and protecting our borders, among other things. The fact that we have allowed our Federal government to intrude so much into the State’s and People’s Rights is why we have the cluster-f**k occurring in our three branches of government. To burden it with this is not only unconstitutional, it’s irrational.
Federalism demands that dual sovereignty, between the Federal government and the States, be maintained. It is the pillar of how a Republic form of government functions. Remember, we are not a Democracy, we don’t want to be a Democracy, the Greeks can tell you how many times it ended up in mob-mad injustice and tyranny. The fate of Socrates should frighten anyone wishing for any form of Democracy other than our Representative Democracy which simply means we have periodic free elections.
Some have contended that the IRS has some type of power over this. This is nonsense. If the State allows gay-marriage then the usual rules of the IRS apply.
If you want to be accurate regarding any violation of marriage and governments incessant intrusions you only need familiarize yourself with the “marriage-penalty” in Obamacare.
The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates reveal that Obamacare is creating a massive new marriage penalty. They estimate that only 14 percent of tax filers who claim the subsidy will be married. About half of the beneficiaries will be single individuals without dependent children. The reason for the marriage penalty is two-fold.
First, the subsidy is linked to 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL), which is estimated to be $45,600 for a one-person household and $61,600 for a two-person household in 2014. The result of linking the tax credit to the FPL is that two individuals who make between $61,600 and $91,200 in 2014 will not benefit from the tax credit if they decide to marry, but both individuals can qualify for the tax credit if they remain unmarried or if they decide to divorce.
Second, a recent HHS rule prevents families from accessing the subsidy if either parent has an offer of coverage at work, but in cases where only self-only coverage is offered, the rest of the family cannot claim a subsidy. Essentially, Obamacare treats otherwise identical individuals very differently, depending on the source of their health insurance rather than the quality of it.
But don’t worry, the Department of HHS has created over 20,000 new pages of regulations already for the monstrosity called Obamacare. If you still believe it will save you money, give you better health care, cover more people or any other nonsense, just wait until all these regulations get exposed and understood. The absolute corruption of power created by “Section 3403” or the IMAB (page 1,000) and in 2017 with “Section 10320” or the IPAB (page 2210) should outrage any Constitutional advocate.
See, we did have to pass it to know what’s in it. It’s a shame so many still have no idea what they will be challenged with.
I hope everyone enjoys paying more for health care just because you’re married, gay or straight.
concernedamerica
So you have no physical evidence to justify your claims? Instead you rely on a specific interpretation of the word "infringe", which includes the word "encroach", from which you find a definition that states "gradual steps and stealth". And because "gradual steps and stealth" can be applied to literally ANY legislation, you use this convoluted definition of "infringe" to make up for the fact that you have zero physical evidence.
You must have pulled that thought process directly out of the "Conspiracy Theorists Handbook".
Let me guess, you believe that a proposed assault weapon ban is really just the start of a "conspiracy" to ban ALL guns, and then confiscate your current weapons. Wait a minute... the government already bans citizens from owning nuclear warheads, and those are considered "arms". Why do they get to have nuclear warheads but we don't? *Gasp* The conspiracy has already started.
I just realized something else. The government does not allow you to own slaves, even though the bible (your religion) specifically states that you can. These are "gradual steps" to ban your right to practice your religion, as specifically detailed in the bible. My god... this conspiracy is bigger than we thought. It's already underway, and people don't even know it. Thank god we have people like you to show us the truth.
JimSpence
Out of curiosity, will they qualify for the tax credit if they stay married but file as single?
Back Country: the words divided and united were obviously the point I was making. So take whatever you want out of context. Dividing up this country is the point of the GOP. United we stand.
unconcerned about America
Actually I do care about your rights. I just understand that the Constitution does not provide for unlimited rights. Free speech is not unlimited, neither is the right to bear arms. The Constitution does not say that the right to bear arms means that any person can have any gun at any time and any place.
The Supreme Court had ten years to overturn the previous assault weapon ban. It did not. We have had a too-often ineffective background check system in place for many years. Shoring up the holes in that system is not unconstitutional. If the legislature passes an unconstitutional law, the Supreme Court will overturn that law.
Justice Scalia, the most conservative of the nine Supreme Court Justices believe that the right to bear arms is not unlimited. Look at the syllabus of the Court's brief that he wrote:
I must admit that I paid no attention to your rant about drones and the economy ..... you were way off topic. It's bad enough that this turned into a gun argument, but at least we are talking about Constitutional rights. It's clear that you want your rights and care not a rat's ass for the rights of others. I care about your rights, but I don't think your rights should extend beyond what even Justice Scalia understands are reasonable limits.
concernedamerica,
Again, you keep claiming that your rights are being stamped upon, but just because you keep saying it, doesn't make it so. You have to back up your claim. The fact that you avoided my question twice suggests that you don't have an answer.
If legalizing gay marriage is stepping on your rights because your religious beliefs says it's wrong, then explain why blood transfusions being legal aren't stamping on the rights of those who oppose blood transfusion for religious reasons. Explain how a standing army paid for by taxes of those whose religious beliefs state that ALL killing is wrong aren't have their religious rights stamped on. Because unless you believe those should be illegal since it infringes on others religious beliefs, then I don't know how you can propose that gay marriage being legal infringes on your religious beliefs.
I await your reply.
Repojam
As of last month, the last time I checked any recent information, no. But don’t worry, it may be addressed in the 20,000 new pages of regulations HHS has created so far. I haven’t tried going through that yet, it took me 2 months to read through the 906 pages of the condensed version of PPACA.
Remember there will be over 155 new bureaucracies, 47 new agencies, boards, and commissions, 68 new grant programs, 16,500 new IRS agents, who are needed just to enforce 20 new taxes. I’m sure all the taxation issues will be very well covered.
Spence
Isn't it fun to try to convince others of your point of view and try to seem like you know what you are talking about by making up a bunch of scary numbers? 155 new bureaucracies ..... my god, how awful!!!! 47 new agencies ...... goddam government is at it again ...... 68 new grant programs ...... just how much is THAT going to cost?
Geez, Jim ..... for about a nanosecond I almost fell for that pack of lies.
I've been thinking more and more about concernedamerican's (and others who think like him/her) position.
By virtue of the fact that something conflicts with a person’s religious beliefs, that thing should be illegal. After all, if it’s legal, it’s infringing on one’s Constitutional religious beliefs.
So, on that basis:
Women driving should be illegal. Women not being covered head to toe should be illegal. Women having jobs should be illegal. Non-kosher foods should be illegal. Eating of certain meats should be illegal. Divorce should be illegal. Living together before marriage should be illegal. Sex before marriage should be illegal. Any sexual act that isn’t performed in the missionary position should be illegal. Having children out of wedlock should be illegal. Birth control should be illegal. Killing of any sort (even in defense) should be illegal. Businesses being open on Sunday should be illegal. Owning worldly possessions should be illegal…
Oh, let’s not forget marriages of other faith should be illegal. And frankly, other faiths should be illegal (as many religions believe it’s immoral to hold any other god before THEIR God). Uh oh – now we’re running into some trouble here.. which religion gets to say other religions are illegal? Isn’t making some religion illegal against the Constitution? Now what? Crap.. we’re in a definite bind here. Someone practicing Islam is conflicts with a Christian’s religious beliefs, but someone practicing Christianity conflicts with a Muslim’s religion beliefs…
Have we yet established the ridiculousness of the position? Or do I need to continue?
The point is just because something conflicts with your religious beliefs doesn’t automatically mean it is infringing on your religious beliefs merely because other people are allowed to engage in it. If you want to make a case that same-sex marriage is somehow infringing on your rights, you have to make a stronger case than just “it conflicts with my religious beliefs.” There are millions of things that are perfectly legal (some of which are also even protected by the Constitution) which conflict with yours or someone else’s religious beliefs. Their mere existence or legality does not infringe on your Constitutional rights to freedom of religion.
don97524
But of course in typical Liberal/Progressive fashion you will continue to believe the government that won't even create a budget to run the biggest economy in the history of man. You will believe Barrack Hussein when he said, "We don't have an immediate crisis in terms of debt," he said in an exclusive interview with George Stephanopoulos for "Good Morning America." "In fact, for the next 10 years, it's gonna be in a sustainable place." This, after he proudly proclaimed less than 4 1/2 years ago that a $4 trillion dollar increase in the National Debt was "unpatriotic".
Does this make Barracks $5.4 TRILLION increase in 4 years treasonous?
It's OK Donny, you can continue to live in your dysfunctional little world of Liberalism/Progressivism and "hope" for that promised "change", I and my family are very comfortable and none of this will affect us, but you my myopic friend will surely be overwhelmed by it when reality slaps you around in a few years.
But don't worry, I'm sure your sacrosanct government that you worship at will throw you your Social Security poverty level "investment" returns and then honor you with your Medicaid level Obamacare. In the meantime Chelsea Clinton will be living in her $10.5 million apartment in New York. That will make you feel better, won't it? Those Clintons only care about the "little guy", right?
Good luck Spanky, God knows you'll need it.
@DickCranium: Your "Dick" should be removed, your balls castrated, and your "Brain" lobotomized. YOU are a sick individual; you are evil and should be destroyed.
You know what is totally unnatural?
When a gay man feels forced by societal pressure to have relations with a woman which is against his nature. It destroys two lives his and hers...the closet kills but serves the desires of the bigoted right wingers--to keep us invisible.
21 years together with my husband, our relationship is extremely valid and we deserve all the rights some so easily take for granted. And it is NOT about economic benefits--if we were legally married then my husband would lose some economic benefits as he has a disability. Right now my income and his are separate. Funny in a household with a significant six figure income.
He is totally accepted by everyone in the extended family--this includes cousins aunt uncles etc....even sister in laws family (And one of them is a preacher) My father never met him, but my mother did and she liked him too.
God made us and he made us as we are.
I've been involved in more debates about gay marriage than I could possibly count. And in nearly every one of those debates at least one person claims that gay marriage infringes on their rights. And every time people have asked "how does it infringe on your rights?" the person never gives an answer.
For example, Concernedamerican has avoided the question at least four times in this thread alone (and seems to have now disappeared entirely).
Anyone else find it telling that no one ever really answers the question "how does gay marriage infringe on your rights?"
I'd venture to say it's because there isn't actually an answer.
I've seen children of friends grow up to be gay. You could see it developing. They didn't force this on their children, they did all they could to stop it. The argument that we choose our sexual orientation just doesn't hold water. Scientists are finding that out today. If you think a child would choose to be gay and face the bullying and name calling they go through, that's hard to believe. You would have to be one tough kid to go through that abuse.
Christ turned no one away. How could any Christian do less than our Lord??? Many of these young men and women are devout Christians, I know that sounds like an impossibility, I have trouble accepting it., but you see it in their everyday lives. They genuinely love the partner. What they do in their bedroom is of none of my business.
Were my child gay, I would be disappointed, but I wouldn't stop loving them. It would sadden me not to have a grandchild of their lineage. So I disagree with those saying they choose how they are, I think we choose to condemn and demean them. They are God's children. You can't say he didn't make us all. Just because some see same sex as un-natural, in the natural world there is every kind of sex and reproduction imaginable.
Being gay isn't addressed by our Constitution. It is everyones right to live as they see fit under the laws. Our founders gave each of us the right to choose. Denying freedom to certain people because of sex, color, religion or sexual orientation isn't what we stand for. Leave these people alone and let them live as free as you.
stop please-1605106
Bull @!$%#. I took NOTHING out of context, you were quite clear-
There is nothing in the Constitution about marriage, according to the 10th Amendment it therefore falls under the provision of the states.
When you're wrong it is best to just admit it, making excuses only makes you seem even more foolish.
and btw, no one has been more divisive than our current President, anyone who can't see that is a blind puppet. So when you're criticizing the GOP don't forget to pass that blame around to everyone who deserves it.
So how are mixed-race couples able to marry in the confederate states today?
Apparently you don't understand how equal protection works, much less how the constitution works in general.
Explain the SCOTUS' decision that marriage is a "basic civil right," in their landmark decision: Loving v. Virgina (1967) then!
skrekk & gordy327
Please don't speak of the Constitution if you know nothing about it. And don't cite SCOTUS cases without bothering to even look at the facts of that case. Prohibiting mixed race marriage violated the 14th Amendment and had nothing to do specifically with marriage.
Moore v Cleveland 1977, will be enough to keep same sex marriage out of the SCOTUS as will the reality that it would set a precedent that would open the door for polygamy and other things that I suspect even you would not approve of.
For the record, I'm a libertarian and would allow anyone to marry whomever they wanted provided everyone was a consenting adult. But I'm not going to twist the Constitution every time it suits me.
I am far more familiar with the Constitution than you realize!
The basis of the case dealt with interracial marriage, but it's the decision of the case by the SCOTUS that has wider implications. The SCOTUS didn't specify interracial marriage, but rather marriage itself.
What do you mean it's going to keep gay marriage out of the SCOTUS? The SCOTUS ia already planning to hear 2 cases surrounding same sex marriage, dealing with DOMA and Prop 8. Your referenced case doesn't deal with gay marriage in the least.
That sounds like the same argument the Catholic Bishops try to use. It's still a flawed on too. The SCOTUS already dealt with the issue of polygamy.
Nor do I. I simply state facts!
Funny.......that's the exact same argument the racists of Virginia used. Maybe you should actually read the transcript of Loving v Virginia?
Maybe you bigots need to stop recycling the same moronic nonsense which caused you to lose in court last time?
Ummmmm.......that case directly contradicts the point you thought you were making. Apparently you're not very good at reading comprehension.
I guess the GOP has finally decided that the hard right wing approach (in many social aspects) isn't a winner anymore. One wonders if that will also be transferred to women and women's reproductive rights soon.....if they have to go up against Hillary in 2016; they better start making that transition quickly. If they don't, Hillary will grab a large share of the women's vote and destroy ANY of the GOP candidates; including Chris Christie.
I just don't see that happening, however. Too many radicals in the party.
And if the left could learn to actually care a little about the fiscal sanctity of the country and not just use tax dollars to buy votes, then everyone could be happy.
honestdebate
Like the right does with tax breaks and deregulation for rich and big business?
Ah - the 47% speech lives on, I see.
Spend a moment to see which Administrations have actually cared about the 'fiscal sanctity' of this country, 'honest'debate. I think the results will surprise you.
You mean 'like both sides do', right? Those tax breaks are just going to lie on the consumer, no matter who is paying them. And these big businesses equal the few, but the left buys votes from millions with our money, I guess you don't care about hat though as long as your side wins.
Ummm, neither, I'm not blind enough to be a partisan ahck like you guys though.
FLnobody? do you live in America? how can you say that when it was the right wing that put us in this financial mess, and the left that is pulling us out? the dow is 14k, unemployment is down to 7.7, the trade deficit is down 20%, What the hell are you saying? Aig paid back it's biollions in bail out and is now a profitable company again.
do you really believe what you post, or are you just another sad old troll?
GeorgePaulJohn, You are really dense so let me explain it to you, the dow is going up because the government is pumping 85 billion dollars a month into the system, unemployment is down because people are dropping out of the workforce like flies, 8.5 million fewer workers in the system since Odumbo took office, the trade deficit is down because countries do not want what we have anymore, we don't produce anything of value to trade. Get a life you partisan hack, get off of your knees and quit sucking Odumbo. All of that juice is frying your brain.
Both parties are guilty. The Democrats demanded that loans be given to people who frankly were incapable of paying it back, the Republicans neutered the regulatory agencies. This constant arguing simply along party lines is absurd and has made any meaningful political change like rowing a boat in sand. It's time that everybody on both sides starting acting like big kids and admitting when they are wrong and praising the other side when they are right.
As for "both parties are gulity" lie. Historically, the republicans get us in the mess. Historically, Democrats get us out of the economic messes the republicons get us into.
Go read your history.
No, they really haven't. The only revelations the GOP have are when it affects them.
Yeah Yeah they left is "buying votes" my question is what make it any better when the right is "increasing contributions" to campaign war chests that is. I would much rather my money goes to someone who needs, and will put it back in a system it then some guy who is already rich and will just horde it. Don't matter who is in power the money will get given away, if you think your side whichever it is don't do the same your just an idiot sheep.
So you're saying that the poor generally spend more money than the rich? Interesting theory that defies all logic.
Michelle123abc - please provide something (anything) that would support your statement that "The Democrats demanded that loans be given to people who frankly were incapable of paying it back". If you are going to state the CRA, realize that that stopped redlining.
Good post! We need to stop trying to make everything a partisan issue and start focusing on finding the best solutions for our country.
Honestdebate
You are not very honest.
This is the attitude that keeps career politicians in office.
As to the history bit, there is no way to factually prove either party is at fault (or gets credit) for historical economic conditions in the US. First, the parties share power so neither party gets to do exactly what they want. Second, the economy is an extremely complex system and it can take decades to see the ramifications of the changes made today. Therefore, it's virtually impossible to definitively say action X caused Y outcome.
We can sit here wasting time debating which party is best, or we can start focusing on the merits of individual ideas. Personally, I want to focus on individual ideas.
Barry Sotero said; "the trade deficit is down because countries do not want what we have anymore, we don't produce anything of value to trade.", which has to be the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.
When the trade deficit goes down it means our exports are up.
"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid." John Wayne
It's rather silly to ask a question and then demand that I don't give you the correct answer. Here is an excellent article on how the CRA played a big part. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6
Thank you for demonstrating my point in that you are clearly an ideologue and represent the problem I was talking about, which is blindly following a party to the point of a religion, I mean you can't be serious in believing that your party has no faults and that all the problems are solely created by republicans. That's insane. And here's a history lesson for you, it was Republicans that freed slaves and championed civil rights. So believe it or not they are not the devil personified, just as the democrats aren't.
I wish I could up vote this a thousand times. Spot on!
honestdebate
funny interpretation, you should definitely change your name though far from honest. No i said any money given to the poor will be spent as they need it for bills, food, ect., and money given to the rich will go in their bank account and sit there. I would think any child could have figured that out, so are you stupid or just dishonest?
IMHO the disconnect is that the two parties have different ideas of what success is. The Republicans feel that if big businesses increase profits every quarter, that's success no matter who they step on to get there. Democrats feel that success is where all have equal opportunity to take part in the American Dream.
Well, it sounds like the liberals, conservatives, moderates, and fringe are going to be in a civil war not all that far from now, so if you people were smart, then you had better get ready for this war that will begin no later by the end of the decade. Why not just begin to kill each other now like people did during the post-Han Dynasty era in China around the second and third centuries A.D.? I just want you all to get it over with and leave me with one or more beautiful women to repopulate the world and to root out your collective stupidity. Thank you.
To the people that say that people are glad to be heterosexual are latently homosexual, that is just a pathetically and thinly disguised form of flirtation, sexual harassment, and discrimination based upon their sexual orientation, which is heterosexual, and they are doing so because their own love lives suck with both genders and with animals. Why not learn to switch psychiatrists and get the mental, psychological, emotional, sexual, and spiritual help that you REALLY need in your lives? Also, what part of "This is sexual harassment and I don't have to take it" do you clearly NOT comprehend? You heterophobes would do well to learn this lesson in your lives.
Furthermore, it appears that, in some states like Kentucky, that the fight for "sexual equality" is beginning to unravel as there are factions that are breaking out in opposite camps. Do you want to not only cause REAL bigots like the KKK, neo-Nazis, the Aryan Nation, the World Church of the Creator, the Westboro Baptist Church, Nation of Islam, etc. but your own constituents of your own brand of hate speech, intolerance, judgmentalism, hypocrisy, and elitism to be at war? If you keep this up, then not only will you have real enemies like those at your front door but they will also attack you within your own houses. You need to realize this as a fact in your lives. Finally, I must point out two things to you lame historical revisionists. The first thing is that it is a choice to believe that sexual orientation is not a choice, thus when you say that it is not a choice, you are denying the obvious fact that you made the choice to believe that it is not a choice and yet, at the same time, you acted no better than a gang or some organized crime family when you deny people the right to dissent and you will do everything from using fraudulent and deceptive practices, libel, slander, defamation of character, extortion, and threats to people to using payola, bias, graft, bribery, money laundering, and racqueteering to even making gang-styled hits, La Cosa Nostra-styled "accidents," and terrorist attacks to keep your members from rebelling against you. Yes, way to be truly diversive and tolerant, people. The second thing that I must point out to you is that, as I have stated before, every society that accepts your form of terrorism as the law of the land has either ceased to exist or it has taken an ever decreasingly smaller role upon the world stage until, like a candle, it is snuffed out completely. However, you heterophobes (homosexuals) are too blind to see the forest from the trees on the issue and you would rather be like the Argonauts that feasted on the lilies instead of taking off your agenda-colored glasses and taking a long, hard look at reality.
flnobody
Big business LOVES regulation, anyone who doubts this has no clue. They spend billions on lobbyists influencing how the regs are written and billions more on lawyers who look for loopholes and make sure they are compliant. Meanwhile the little guys can't afford to keep up so are easily consumed or simple run over by "big business". We need less regulation so the little guys can have a fighting chance, more competition benefits us all especially when it gives us the opportunity to avoid the big businesses altogether.
And btw, you do understand that 47% of people in this country, none of whom are "rich", pay no Federal income tax and that the reason that percentage is as high as it is is because republicans gave everyone a tax break right?? The idea that republicans only give breaks to the rich is just a talking point the left hands out to it's parrots.
Backcountry
You are totally incorrect. Once again you have defended the Republican party without taking the time to become acquainted with the facts. All you need to do to verify your bogus claims is to look at who makes up that 47% that Romney identifies as "takers"
If you knew anything about the tax code, Backcountry, you would know that the Bush tax cuts lowered tax rates, but did not eliminate taxes for low income Americans. Republicans have, however, supported some tax loop holes which have allowed some wealthy Americans to escape all taxes.
LOL...
Exact same thing I told him yesterday, but I suppose as long as he believes his OWN foolishness, he's having an "honestdebate" with himself!! LOL
Another thing I find interesting in the #2 thread here, is how an article about a hypocritical republican senator accepting Gay's, now that his son has come out, has turned into a budget and bash President Obama article. Does that mean those posting about President Obama and the budget have a short memory span?
IMHO-2730490,
Yeah, history says your wrong. We are in this economic mess because of Clinton. Anyone who doesnt understand or know this is either ignorant, or chooses not to listen to fact.
"societies evolve. human rights expand" for a period of time yes, then society realizes the mistakes they have made in their definition of human rights. this would be a cyclical occurence - eventually societies revert and the process repeats
I guess God got it wrong eh? I guess 6,000 years of spiritual development was all wrong? Portman, you need to understand that your not there to represent your homo son, your there to represent us. Your son is only one of 314,000,000 Americans. I hope the people of Ohio will respond by taking this guy out of office as soon as possible.
don97524
"... that the reason that percentage is as high is because..."
I never said ALL of those people pay no fed income tax because of republicans. Take a minute to actually read the posts you respond to before you whip out your laminated list of talking points
You think I'm the one who doesn't understand the tax code??? If your rate drops the amount you own drops, if the amount you owe falls below what you take in deductions you pay zero, duh. In 2000, before the Bush tax cuts, 25% of people paid no fed income tax, today that number is 47%. Perhaps you'd care to explain the reasons behind this drastic change if it has nothing to do with the Bush tax cuts.
Take you party blinders off and you'll seem like less of a puppet.
You are nuts if you really think that is true. Clinton left office with 23 million new jobs created several balanced budgets given to congress and 1.5 trillion in forecast revenue to pay down the debt and he added nothing to said debt. It takes a real dumbaz troll to even post crap like that. and BTW this is a seed about a republican having a miracle change in a position not Clinton idiot.
The Democrats demanded that loans be given to people who frankly were incapable of paying it back
This lie has been disproved so many times only the mentally challenged have the nerve to post it. think about how long anyone would last if you proposed to tell the almighty banks they HAD to loan money to anyone. There is no such law. The CRA which was nothing more than an effort to make banks do the right thing did not in any way affect their ability to grant or refuse loans to any one.
Backcountry is a resident troll pay no attention to his right wing garbage almost to a letter are lies
false
true.
Dr. Logic, what an ironic name seeing as how you are absolutely void of all logic. Try this, directed at Portman (and there is a very specific reason I open with such a harsh statement, if you have any brains at all you'll understand why at the end): How pathetic can you be? Sir, your son is disease stricken and that is how he will die. Homosexuality is a disease, a naturally occurring one, but a disease nonetheless. Yes, some animals are gay, that’s a fact; here's another fact, when animals are gay, they are shunned, they live a life of solitude, they are not able/allowed to breed or raise young, and then they die, and all of this happens so that their gay "genes"' are not passed on to the next generation; it's evolution 101. You gays should be able to appreciate that seeing as how you don't believe in God. That is a perfectly logical and reasonable argument that leaves God and morality completely out of it. Try thinking about it this way... millions of people have AIDS or cancer or what-have-you, take your choice of diseases but I'll use AIDS since it goes hand-in-hand with being gay; many of these diseases are incurable and people have no choice but to live with it and spend their lives trying to overcome it. We do not try to spread these diseases in mass production, no sir, we try to eradicate them. What makes your son so special that you would support his disease? You can support your son without supporting his disease. You have previously said so yourself that you do not support same sex marriage but now you find out that your son is a flamer and all of a sudden you change you mind? You selfish, pathetic, hypocrite; you are now classified as a liberal. Follow this link: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/ ...your son is at a much higher risk of contracting AIDS due to his homosexuality. Do you support that sir? If he contracts AIDS will you change your mind about AIDS too and support that disease as well? I understand that this is hard for you to accept and that you are probably having some difficulty dealing with your son's situation but you need to stop thinking and acting like a liberal; leave your emotions out of the equation, you're letting them get the best of you, that is what liberals do. Before you found out your son was gay you were able to think reasonably, rationally, and logically about the idea of homosexuality; you were not emotionally involved. After you found out your son was gay you changed your mind all of a sudden...why? What changed? You knew before that homosexuality exists, that it's real. So why the change in heart? Were you a heartless prick before and are now all of sudden full of compassion? No sir, I'll tell you what changed...you got emotionally involved and let your emotions get the best of you. That is what liberals do; the whole basis of liberalism is predicated on one simple idea...emotion. Liberals prey on the emotions of their supporters; they find whatever emotions they can and exploit those emotions to push their agenda. Every single liberal agenda is pushed in this fashion. They find a victim and the exploit that victim by preying on the emotions that are caused by that victim's situation. Think about it, every liberal agenda has a victim as it's centerpoint, gun control, immigration, tax hikes, healthcare, prochoice, and so on.
Giantego
Prove they are lies. Or are you to stupid to do anything other than parrot talking points like a good little puppet?
and btw, I'm not "right wing" maybe if you had the ability to think for yourself you'd have noticed my defense of gay rights and my criticism of all the bigots who oppose it both on the right and left.
While that may be true in some cases, in this case, that is when he posted:
he's 100% spot on. One of the biggest drivers of why 47% pay no income tax is because the Bush tax cuts dropped more people off the rolls.
This is why I find it hilarious that Republicans now use the "47%" meme as an attack dog, because THEY caused it be reducing the taxes everyone pays.
If the Republicans ever find the means to drop all income tax rates to less than 1%, will they then have to the gall to turn around and lament the fact that "99% of the country are 'takers', they pay no income tax, boo hoo." Somewhat unsurprisingly, I don't think they would have any trouble doing just that...
@BackCountry:
you catch more flies with honey...
DrowningGrover
I've been saying that for years but the republicans just can't grasp it. They have been utterly brainwashed into believing that all of our fiscal problems are the fault of democrats "buying" votes from "freeloaders".
I have no delusions about "catching" anyone. I knew before I posted it that he won't come back to defend his statement. All of his posts are full of vague claims about how wrong others are with no attempt to explain exactly why or how so. Frankly, puppets and parrots aren't really worth "catching".
They are brainwashed into believing that because they WANT to believe that.
It's easier to blame poor people and minorities for all your problems than it is to admit your policies have a very real effect on the economy. It's like calling Obama "the Foodstamp President," as if he WANTED more people on food stamps and that the rise in the number of Americans receiving them isn't just a predictable reaction to the 2nd greatest economic collapse in more than a century.
Although I myself and quite liberal, i'm always more than willing to give credit where credit is due, so it's good to see you recognize the massive F'ing flaws in the "47%" meme.
fair enough.
Guess we will never be rid of the idiot libtards. Since when does support or anti support for homosexuality have anything to do with political parties? just shows how dumb you people really are
Ebeneser, let's spend a bit more time on "emotion," which, you state is unnecessary and apparently even a burden on the thinking man. Turn away from a soldier who returns from a Conservative-implemented useless war who has had his face, arms or legs blown off without offering some measure of care, because that, of course, would involve emotion. Turn away from any support for organizations which were established to protect children, whether of rich or poor birth, who were abused and maimed, because that would involve some form of empathy or sympathy, both of which are emotions. Turn away from the elderly, who perhaps were abused by their children,and even left without any care, because that would involve emotion. Why should you care about their quality of life. Turn away from a race, which, because of redistricting and identity burdens, are prevented from exercise their right to vote as citizens of the USA, to the benefit of the Conservatives, because that would involve righteous emotion. And, of course, when you see, or hear of, animals beaten, neglected and starving, turn away from those too because after all, they are not human, so why bother caring. Caring is emotion. And if you see someone hanging off a cliff by the tips of his fingers, walk away! Why should you give a damn if he lives or dies. And if you hear of a man or woman without any caring family, or any family at all, who forged a lifelong friendship with another, who needs emergency medical care, by all means, do not give his or her friend the right to make medical decisions for him by allowing the other to be called "spouse." Why should you care if that individual lives or dies? That would involve emotion. After all, those "kinds of people" have no use, right? Emotion. The integral part of qualifying as a human being. Are you?
Giantego,
I worked with and talked to people in the industry. You are 100% wrong. They were forced to make loans they knew people couldnt pay. Forced too.
Did you also know Clinton took money from social security, and he only started balancing the budget when the congress became republican and forced him to work with them?
Goes to show you, to be a liberal, you have to choose to be ignorant, or just plain dumb.
If you are turning this into a tax and budget debate, then include all the tax code. I've read it's thousands of pages. Now there has to be loop holes that can be closed along with subsidies to different industries. As for the 47%, many want to work, but there are no jobs. When Congress allowed our industries to move jobs to foreign shores and to have products made where wages and work conditions ar bad, that's when we lost our revenue base and created this mess. Obama, like Republicans wants to reduce the tax load on business to make bringing jobs back more favorable to industry. Practically everything we purchase comes from foreign manufacturers. It should be obvious why we have so few paying taxes.
Lobbying and big donors are certainly playing a part in our tax code. We read everyday where some Republican or Democrat lawmaker has received funds from some business or someone wealthy influencing their vote. The People have been sold out for the dollar and power. A cooperation the same as an individual, get real here. Buying votes in Congress didn't start yesterday, it started in the very beginning and has never been stopped. As long as there are those willing to pay there will be those willing to sell. We only elect our representatives from our state and elect the President by National vote. We don't elect federal judges, or federal department secretaries if we did big money might not count as much. Course this isn't a good idea. At some point, we the people have to make Congress and our Presidents serve us. Being individuals we don't stand a chance.
Redistricting has become a problem in almost all states. Federal law currently reviews certain southern states to keep voting districts fair. Maybe it needs to be instituted nationally. When one party or the other has the majority in a state, they tend to make sure they stay in power by loading districts.
A wonderful example of a man who put the love of his son over the bigotry and dogma of those who would chose to marginalize him for being nothing more than who he is, and who he loves.
Amazing how when this gets personal, rationality takes over.
For those who find this upsetting, you don't have to 'agree' with homosexuality, gay rights or gay marriage, but you have no right to deny those who are gay, the secular legal equal rights that would let them live their lives as they see fit. It has no effect on yours. At all.
Behavior is ALWAYS a choice. Nature made us heterosexual. People choose to pervert what nature intended.
Oh, by the way, Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
We're not living under the Old Covenant anymore... but I'm sure that you could "reason" things out to the contrary, huh?
"Oh, by the way, Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
Do you eat shrimp and lobster?? Funny hos selectively fundamental you fundamentalist are.
JPArch: What is amazing about any of this? Didn't you know that all politicians are amoral? Or as some would say, they practice situational morality. Your "no effect on yours. At all." statement is just another example of amorality. Leviticus 18:22 encapsulates the moral mandate quite clearly.
Lonesome Rhoades-2738573
Leviticus also says i can own slaves. When do we all get own you?
P.S. How many times do you have to be reminded. God does not make the laws of the United States. Christianity it not the national religion, and the BIBLE nor GOD is mentioned in the United States Constitution.
I see our resident geneticist and molecular biologist, LR, has checked in. lol.
stupid post, as always. Sexual orientation is not a choice.
Oh, by the way, 1st amendment to the United States constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion." I don't care what your 2,000-year-old book says, it does not trump the freedoms guaranteed to all citizens by the constitution of the United States. Our laws are not taken from the Bible. If they were, we couldn't shave or wear cotton-polyester blends. Leviticus has that in there too.
So the point is, you're free to believe that homosexuality is a perversion (that's in the constitution as well, in the very same amendment: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"). And I'm free to tell you that you are wrong, and I can even cite specific examples. In 2011, 3.5% of Americans identified themselves as lesbian, gay, or bisexual -- 8% of rams prefer the same gender according to a 2004 study (a later study put the number at 10%, but I'll err on the side of what will blow your mind the least). With mallard ducks, it's about 19%. So if you want to talk about what nature intended, it may help to actually look at what happens in nature, where there aren't any ducks pulling out old books and saying "You shouldn't do that because some guy in the year 538 BC said God told him it was bad."
You don't get to force your beliefs upon others. The whole reason for that being in the constitution is that we were getting out from under the thumb of the Church of England. Now we've got a bunch of people like you trying to do the same thing, just with different churches.
And before anyone comes back with "well you're trying to force the gay lifestyle on us," just stop. Nobody is forcing you to get gay married. Nobody is forcing you to have sex with someone of the same gender. Us heterosexuals (because yes, I'm straight) get to keep doing what we're doing. The only difference for you is that society doesn't have your back anymore when you teach hateful things to your children.
Got any tattoos, Lonesome? BTW, Christians should focus on the New Testament, you know, the part with Jesus in it. The Old Testament was stolen from the Jews in an attempt to legitimize the claim the Jesus was the Jewish Messiah.
SICK
Lonesome,
In addition to the Levitican slaves are good, shellfish is taboo thingy; how about those accursed cotton/poly no iron shirts in your closet? OMG, LR has serious sin in his closet. Oh, the humanity.
If you believe homosexuality is a choice, then you must believe you, yourself choose your sexuality. If you can choose your sexuality, then you can choose to be gay/lesbian anytime you want. That would make you latently homosexual. Should you not be able to receive heterosexual stimulus, then at anytime you, yourself could choose to be aroused homosexually.
Or, you can truly believe that sexuality is not a choice. Believe instead that your sexuality is who you are. Just accept it and accept those who have accepted it, and move on in a civilized fashion.
It doesn't matter if someone chooses to be or not to be homosexual/heterosexual. We do NOT discriminate in the United States of America because of someone's sexual orientation.
"Nature made us heterosexual. People choose to pervert what nature intended."
Actually nature make both heterosexuals and homosexuals, plus everything in between. As it has been observed in close to 1500 species (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals). Now you may not like wikipedia but there is that little section at the end called <references> that can be very interesting.
And remember this is just a rebuttal to your claim that nature make only heterosexuals. Do not twist my words and post idiotic replies like :
- Whaaaat ? So since animals do it it's ok for humans to do it.
- You want us to act like animals, you must not have any moral.
- Animals commit infanticide too, do you really think we should too ?
YOU made a statement that was proven incorrect countless times, grow a pair and admit you're wrong, don't try to deflect.
ItsAboutTime-3704531
Leviticus also says i can own slaves. When do we all get own you?
ANOTHER TACTIC USED TO DIMINISH THE MORAL BELIEFS OF OTHERS. The Bible also says that you must wash before eating, pray frequently, etc. Society does practice slavery today. We enslave ourselves by spending more than we earn. However, this slavery is diminished in our humane society because you can cheat those you have robbed from by declaring bankruptcy instead of becoming a slave to them and paying what you owe.
P.S. How many times do you have to be reminded. God does not make the laws of the United States. Christianity it not the national religion, and the BIBLE nor GOD is mentioned in the United States Constitution.
You are correct, Christianity isn't the national religion. Neither is any other belief or atheism . However, the moral feelings of the legal citizens of this country do matter, and their effect on the laws of the United States is logical and inevitable. Unfortunately, in the rush to make sure athiests aren't offended, our judges and politicians have diminished the beliefs and morals of the majority of it's citizens who believe in God and try to follow His revealed word. This results in the minority making the rules. Which rules are, in many cases, offensive to the majority.
A nation cannot for long always please the minority and displease the majority and continue to exist. The only possible way this can last for any length of time is for those in positions of authority to try and convince the citizenry that what they are doing is fair and that their moral beliefs don't matter. That will only prolong the authority of those governing for a short time. Soon all respect for government will be lost and then the country will experience anarchy.
I see I am getting philosophical so I'm going to sign off for now. Y'all have a great day.
Maybe if we are lucky, LR's neighbor will go over to his house and smite him for being an as-wipe...is that too much to ask?
Hy41,
So you are saying that if the population in the U.S was say 80% atheist and 20% percent religious that it would not be an issue? Since when did majority rules over ride civil rights?
It doessnt matter if there was just 2 people. You cant violate their rights.
Hy, you got to run everything for a very long time with the church rules imposed on everyone. If you get your beliefs diminished because of what I do in my bedroom or who I marry, perhaps you might want to re-examine why you believe what you do. Really, is your faith that weak? Are your morals that shaky that I or anyone else can diminish them by our actions?
What you do in your bedroom and who you marry aren't going to change my morals...what a hypocritical post you made. So those whose beliefs don't happen to be the same as yours can be disregarded (as they have been for a long time anyway), but if those who agree with your beliefs don't get preferential treatment it isn't fair and your morals are somehow diminished? You are basically saying that the only right way to live is your way, and that is actually what turns a lot of people off to religion in the first place. If you don't want to marry someone of your sex, then don't. But don't forget that one day when you are in the minority in some way or belief system you will want to be heard, too. It's like Portman...he was against gay marriage until it mattered to his family. Be honest. Christians have been able to get away with having things any way they want for a very long time, and now it is leaning toward being fair for everyone. I understand that's hard to get used to, but yes, atheists pay taxes and are just as important in this country as Christians. It's a balance that can be hard to find, but your beliefs on this topic are yours and not everyone's. If it diminishes your beliefs if gay marry then your beliefs are pretty shaky in the first place.
You confuse behavior with orientation, and homosexuality has been observed in nature too!
However, religion is a choice, unless you're completely brainwashed into following it and/or incapable of thinking for yourself.
Just another politician serving his own personal needs at the taxpayers expense.
hy, you can sit with a straight face and claim morality, when some of your most vociferous mouthpieces are some of the biggest wh@remongers and adulterers around. Good point Charley, about the shrimp and lobster. I'll bet they love their bacon too.
Hy41
I'm not the one quoting Leviticus or any other religious jargon to deny americans the same civil rights. Again, God is not mentioned anywhere in the United States Constitution. The Bible is not mentioned, nor is Christianity. Christianity is NOT the national religion, and in this nation, secular law is HIGHER than your christian rights.
Everyone is entitled to their religious beliefs, but those BELIEFS END where others secular rights begin.
Go read the United States Constitution. IN the eyes of the law, we are all 100% EQUAL and entitled to the same EQUAL RIGHTs
J.P. Dogly if you're concerned about Old Testament and New Testament, which I doubt you are, it's in the new testament as well.
1 Corinthians 6:9 What! Do ​YOU​ not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men,10nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.11And yet that is what some of ​YOU​ were. But ​YOU​ have been washed clean, but ​YOU​ have been sanctified, but ​YOU​ have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.
Maybe you can't change who you are, but you can decide what you do. If you like men, but think it's wrong, you just don't sleep with men. It's like alcoholism. If you feel it's wrong, don't drink. Maybe it's hard, but youc an do it.
If you live your life based on the writings of Bronze Age barbaric desert nomads, you are a fool.
Homosexuality exists in over 1400 species on the planet. Homophobia only exists in one. Which one seems unnatural now?
Christ did not abolish the laws statutes and judgements. In his own words found in Matthew 5:18:
"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
This is not some preacher, these are the words of Christ.
"You have to Live it to "Feel" it---Gay marriage---another parent hasn't walked in the shoes of a child who is of a different sexual orientation, will never know what it is like. No parent wants to "lose" their Adult Child"; because of different beliefs--
Good Parents unconditionally accept their children no matter what orientation they are---it is called true Paternal/Maternal Love----Rob Portman is Courageous, and so is his Son.
Dills: And if you don't think it's wrong, then there's no problem!
@DILLS83: Paul is said to have wrote this; the "Pauline" or "Gentile" version of Christianity won a lot of followers due to: No mandated circumcision and no restrictions on food.
God didn't SAY anything about homosexuality. MAN said that God said it was a sin. MAN said A LOT of things: "...love one another as yourselves..."; or "...do unto other as you would have others do unto you..."
We are all born to be exactly who we were meant to be. Period. I don't have the right to choose who YOU were meant to be and you don't have the right to choose who I was meant to be. THAT is what GOD meant. That message has just been diluted over the centuries by different interpretations of writings translated from language to language by MEN and their ego's. Sad, I know, but true.
I used to be addicted to men, but 7 years ago Jesus set me FREE!(YouTube video) I made the switch from being married to my first wife by ditching her and our 2 sons to go into the gay life-choice. Today I am FREE, DELIVERED and married to a beautiful woman of God. I won't go back! ALL HAIL KING JESUS!!!
Thanks, Mr. Bachmann.
Mr. Bachmann, your boyfriend keeps calling asking which restaurant you said to meet at.
Jesus is a king ? That must mean God is dead...
Cause, you know, usually the crown goes down to the first born son after the father's death.
But anyway I'd really like to see that youtube video of Jesus you say you have.
King James was gay.
xgayGreg
"I used to be addicted to men, but 7 years ago Jesus set me FREE!(YouTube video) I made the switch from being married to my first wife by ditching her and our 2 sons to go into the gay life-choice. Today I am FREE, DELIVERED and married to a beautiful woman of God. I won't go back! ALL HAIL KING JESUS!!!
Baloney. I bet if some twenty something twink with a bubble butt made eye contact with you, you would waste no time getting aroused and trying to make it with him. You were either NEVER gay or just trying to fool you current wife. Being gay is NOT a choice, you were born that way just like you were born with blue eyes or a small penis.
Ok, so you're a gay guy in denial and married to a woman.
Xgay Greg: I can't find your video of Jesus setting you free, on YouTube. . .do you think those nasty atheists took it down?
Please tell me you saved a copy! Now we can prove that he really was blue-eyed, and with light brown hair like he has in all the pictures.
conservative liberal, I find your statement to be fitting since you happen to have a guy who is a supporter of what you say named Barney Frank in your camp...talk about a regular sausage fest, right (and no, I do not mean the meat that you buy in the stores, either)? gordy327, you are just like your name is, a sexist pig who is clearly having issues in your life to the point of which you should become a magazine subscription and ditto for you two porkers, StrontiDog and conservative liberal. What part of "This is sexual harassment and I don't have to take it" do you not get, you dummies? If anyone is in denial of anything, it is the three of you that are trying to hide some perverted, sick, and deviant sexual fantasies to try and rape Greg, to ridicule him and his ability to break free from your cult/gang-like mentality, or to cause some sort of "accident" to befall him and thus end up silencing another one of your enemies. I have seen you at work before and if the majority of people that are in the society at large had the common sense, courage, morality, ethics, and intellect to take you on as you should be taken on, then I assure you that people like you would become nothing more than a footnote in human history. You dimwits had better heed these warnings seriously in your lives, you know, "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown" and "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely?" You can laugh at me all that you want but if you do so, it might end up with the fastest sex change in the world courtesy of a size 13 foot that will hit your genitals due to your stupidity and attempts to do many illegal things on that man.
Way to have the concepts of choice, conviction, common sense, and an open mind, Greg. Sadly, many intolerant, sexist, elitist, judgmental, arrogant, narcissistic, egotistical, egomaniacal, megalaomanical, discriminatory, prejudicial, and hypocritical bigots that still think that way will pretend to have open minds while simultaneously proving the hypocritical truth of also having the most closed minds of any humans on the face of the planet. Only legislation and harsh action will keep them in check if not fix the problem. Prayer, so it seems, would inevitably lead to this path and you might have to be like a modern-day Lot and fight them off, too. I did not want to see another Sodom and Gomorrah but it looks as if that is what is going to happen and it will be world-wide, too.
I see all you have to offer to the discussion is personal attacks. Duly noted!
Who's making the claim of sexual harrassment?
After reading your nonsensical and inflammatory rant, believe me, I am laughing! ROTFLMAO! I'd probably laugh harder if it wasn't so pathetic!
Project much?
Prayer is nothing more than a mental placebo.
That too is also laughable! LOL
How would this not be so different from a loving brother and sister who want to consummate their relationship with the state. They should absolutely be able to, they're both consenting adults, who may have a child, or may not...love conquers all right?
There sure are a lot supporters in our society that want people to experiment and come out of their closet, but when you have people who have decided to curb their sexual conditioning you say they were born that way, and not allow them to reconsider their position because you can't understand it? That's like saying a child molester cannot be reconditioned. Exercise some tolerance for christ sake people.
Amanda
Do want to legalize incest just to make a stupid point?
thetruthteller LOL ur funny thanks for the laughs
I guess I'm not the only one who thinks so too.
Exactly, just because you believe some races should sit in the back of the bus and states should decide it doesn't make you a racist either.
WilliamOfRites: This isn't a racial issue. It is a moral issue. Your logic is only effective on the ignorant and the amoral.
It's not a moral issue, it's a civil rights issue.
"It's not a moral issue, it's a civil rights issue."
Declared by you, NOT by God.
See #5.2
Is see, you have changed your logic. It's not the races sitting in the back of the bus anymore, making it a racial issue. It is now a "civil rights" issue which means, whatever ........
but blacks sitting in the back of the bus WAS a civil rights issue. lol.
and yes, it IS "declared by us and not God". That's how we make laws here in this country under the Constitution. You should read it someday. :)
But maybe someday we can all believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster and come together in the right holy attitude.
I'll take the word of flbikerchick over your imaginary friend any day.
And yes I'm aware you think I'll burn in hell and all that.
Hy, until you face the fact that not everyone believes as you do, and that your way isn't the only way to believe, you will sit in judgement. Wasn't there a passage about that in the Bible? Maybe more than one...
But it is a moral issue as well. It isn't morally correct to prevent two consenting adults who love each other from marrying just because someone doesn't think they should marry, and that is true whether they are of two different races, two whites, two blacks, or two gay people. Fairness and compassion are supposed to be part of the morality of Christians from what I remember in all my Catholic school years and the hours and hours of church since then. Guess that only applies when it's something you happen to agree with or that affects you personally...I keep forgetting.
Marriage is a civil rights issue. This is not a moral issue, as morality is subjective and cannot be legislated!
Who cares? your god has no place or say in our secular laws!
Apparently, you have no clue what civil rights means, or how they are applied in law. But marriage itself is a civil right, so it falls under civil rights and the law!
error
If its declared by God let him come tell us all what to do. I want to hear him say it.
OOHH that's right hes silent on the issue other than some scribblings in text that was written by apostles supposedly hearing voices.
Actually pretending corporations are people is amoral, but somebody tell that to that pub puppet Justice Roberts.
Wait, Deebo, News Flash. God HAS spoken in the modern era, He told George W to run for President, as well as Michelle Bachmann. I just wish they'd have recorded those conversations. I'd like to hear what He sounds like.
Hy if God feels its so important, why didnt Jesus say anything about homosexuality? Why did God only mention it in the Old Testament along with not eating shellfish? Then Jesus said we dont have to follow the old rules, and never said, oh except homosexuality. The Bible doesnt even support your hate Hy.
Mr Burns,
Jesus did indirectly affirm the Law (old rules). In Matthew 5:17 He said “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
Part of the Law was stoning persons who practiced homosexual acts. So, Jesus gave credence to the Law of Moses which was really his Law because He gave it to Moses as God himself back in the Old Testament.
Hy41,
We both have the same hope of standing before God and knowing we are right because we acknowledge that God is right.
Now, we just imagine the terror that will be on the faces of God's enemies here when they stand before Him with no place to run or argument to forth that will change their outcome. No human can tell his/her maker...You God are wrong!
This is why we stand for and with Jesus Christ to the end of this world because we look forward to the world to come with Jesus.
So do you eat shelfish, wear clothes from two different threads, etc? Or are you like any other bigot who twists Christianity to support their hate?
That's what the Mormons and Southern Baptists said about mixed-race marriage.
You're a sell-out Portman. Sorry I voted for you!
Because he finally came to accept the fact that it doesn't affect him in any way if two consenting adults want to have a relationship. It's people like you who are dragging the Republican party down to irrelevance. What happened to the party that championed civil rights and unequivocal civil liberties?
Maybe he realizes, that SCOTUS is going to rule in favor of gay marriage, and he sees this as an opportunity for him to get more votes? That would be the real republican way..... or maybe he just realizes.. LOVE IS LOVE and we DO NOT discriminate in the US because of someone's sexual orientation.
Awwww, poor Lonesome lost another one to tolerance and intelligence.
Maybe you and Rush and Newt could buy an island somewhere and have a lifelong threesome.
Lonesome Rhodes-You will need to get used to the selling out part of your party because that is the only way they will survive! "Old, pale, stale, white males like yourself are the dinosaurs of today, and the skeletons of tomorrow". We will someday read about how this bizarre cult of white guys were some of the most discriminatory a-holes of their time and the world is now a better place with most of them being dead and gone! (Cue the Funeral March). By the way, living your life by believeing what some yahoos wrote in a book thousands of years ago is virtual proof that you are headed to extinction! See Ya! Oh, by the way, there's not really a bearded head in the clouds that tellls you what to do either, sorry to pee in your Cheerios!
FlaNative, you owe me a keyboard. Coffee everywhere! ROFLMAO
How do you know that the bearded head he is seeing is Jesus...maybe he left his tv on Duck Dynasty...
Enjoy your time in office Portman. You will not get re-eleted as a Republican. You can always change to a Democrat. They will welcome your sickening liberal butt into their world of sick, un-natural, world. Personnally I'd like to see them round up every gay in this country, send them over to Saudi and see how long their devil filled souls last!!~ LMAO
Steve-452464-Why do I get the distinct feeling you were jerking off when you wrote your last little diatribe? You seem to be obsessed with the gay world. Curious?
IMHO-Sorry about that! But it was just too easy!
I bet you would make a great parent, Steve. I feel sorry for any kids you might have. You don't like who they are and you want Saudi Arabia to murder them. Nice...did you learn all that compassion and those parenting skills in church or make them up in your own head? These are people we are talking about.
LR, I'm sure Mr Portman is losing sleep every night because you won't vote for him next term. As if anybody in Washington has you on speed dial to get your slant on things before they vote
Easy like you being on the street corner, FlaNative1955?
Your sorry it's not the 1950s, where you can bash a gay in a dark alley. It's the only way people like you can achieve an erection.
They have deviled filled souls? You're the one who's acting like Hitler, and they have the problem? You need professional help, and not the kind that comes from pedophile priests. That 20 minutes you spend a week pretending to be a good Christian? It's not working for you.
Steve, you remind me of GWB, the Great Crusader ready to kill thousands while masquerading as a good Christian. Hypocrisy is the only way you can lead your miserable existence. I pity the fool.
OOHH that's right hes silent on the issue other than some scribblings in text that was written by apostles supposedly hearing voices.
@ Deboo....Memorize that phrase ...one day you are going to be asked to the one you insulted now ,I or others are not insulting your Lucifer or who ever you believe in ,debates over issues and opinions has nothing to do with who we believe in and who we trust in.I wonder why people regardless of believes when it comes to calamities ,or life and death are calling "OH MY GOD !!!!!!! or OH GOD !!!.
I suggest stay on political issue and do not insult GOD with your smart comments ,you will regret one day.
Threats from your imaginary friend? Very convincing.
Sounds like your imaginary friend is rather thin-skinned and psychologically insecure.
Ya think? Welcome to earth.....
where did all these ball players come from (Field of Dreams)?
all this article tells me is that the father was a d*ckhead and is still probably a d*ckhead
One advantage of an education (liberal education if I might) is the ability to place oneself mentally in a variety of situations. For example, how would I feel and cope if I could no longer walk, how would I feel and cope if my face was severely distorted following an automobile accident, how would I feel and cope if one or more of my children reported that they were homosexual, etc.). How is it that these Republican lawmakers (presumably with some form of a liberal education) are unable to imagine events but have to experience them in reality before they are able to understand them? Is it a deficiency in their education or are there human genetics that produce brains without this capability?
The hopeful side of me believes that Portman and other formerly gay-bashing right wingers are finally gaining some sense after their personal experiences showed them the error of their ways.
The more cynical side of me believes these guys would still be gay-bashing if it were politically advantageous to do so. Now that the general public is becoming more tolerant, these guys are suddenly seeing the light? Maybe, but I doubt it.
Who really cares anymore,it's just another distraction from being taken to the cleaners by king obama.And all the other smart people who know how we should live,keep giving the same a-holes power to tell you what to do and they'll take it,as far gays,whatever, there people too.don't agree,but none of my business,and none of the fed's either.state issue.
Yep, it's a state issue, just like slavery.
That darn Obama. Now he's making Republicans sons gay.
state's issue- great!. when can we sign up to have the vote taken away from women and minorities. becauseour country did better before they got the vote (sarcasm key off)
dean, There we go again with the King fetish. I wonder what other kinky little fantasies you have harbored in that tiny little cyst you call a brain
It would have been nice if he'd come to this decision because...I don't know...it's the right thing to do and not because his son might benefit from it later.
You are so right. I have trouble digesting this for that very reason. He is late to the party, and only because it affects him and his family. If this had been the kid next door, Portman would still be selling LGBT people down the river. That said, I have empathy for his growing pains and welcome him into the light, if a little late. Now, let's see him influence other cave-dwellers with this.
The entertaining thing about a bear dancing is not how well the bear dances. It's that the bear dances at all.
That's how "conservatives" are. If it doesn't happen to them, they don't care.
At the end of the day, I'm glad he was able to come around, no matter what path he took. It would have been nice had he been able to have empathy for people from different walks of life than his own, rather than not caring until it effected him personally. If we start condemning people for the manner in which they join the party late, I fear we will stop seeing latecomers altogether. Better late than never.
We have to take the little victories as they come. Each convert that sees the error of their ways is one less we have to convince.
I agree that that would have been a better reason, not that I support same sex marrige, but for him to chang e his mind because it will help his son is more wrong than same sex marrige
Yup, it is agreed that he should have had empathy for gays and lesbians regardless IF his son was gay....Glad he is enlightened NOW, however could have used his support for some time...Either way, he is on the right side of thinking now (despite if it is self-serving) and I just want equal rights for all asap.
he has Convenient Convictions ....I guess it's all about him and his
"it's all about him and his"
Of course it is. He is a typical politician without moral bearing and without any interest in God and country.
You mean, sort of like Obama's "Convenient Convictions" which he held for years before the November election, that was only changed in the wake of his VP Joe Biden making it impossible for Obama to stick to almost exactly his same way of thinking as Portman's, at least until after he got through a tough election? And which the "mainstream" liberal news media outfits such as CBSnews dot com is branding as a "stunner", versus branding Obama's thought process in changing his former thoughts on the issue 180* little more than a yr. ago as "evolutionary thinking" before quietly dropping all further discussion of any hypocrisy or ulterior motives? Is that what you might possibly be including as "Convenient Convictions"? Probably not, huh...
Lol...yeah, make it about Mr. Obama...I was waiting for that.
Hy~
If you want god involved in your country's laws, move to a theocratic country. I hear Iran is lovely this time of year.
That's very nice of you Rob Portman to care about the issues when your sons' life and happiness are involved. Too bad you didn't care enough when other people's childrens' lives and happiness were involved. Sounds like a rather self-serving reversal rather than acting, as you are paid to to, for the good of all the citizens.
I would cautiously give Portman the benefit of the benefit of the doubt on this one. It's human nature to not be able to truly see an issue til it effects someone close to you. I had the benefit of having an uncle who was with the same guy for nearly 45 years(until the guy died). He took care of him when when he was sick at the end too. So maybe he's actually learned something? "The grinch's heart grew three sizes that day."
Yes, I would say that as well. It's too bad it took this, but at least he isn't bashing his son.
it's like this...if you want to call it a civil union, noone should be standing in the way. The church decides who does and does not get "married".
case closed
I would disagree with you on several points in that post, the most important being that you have put the "church" above G-d. G-d decides who does and who does get married, not man, nor man's "church". -end
this is a discussion of legal marriage, so "man" absolutely does get to decide who gets married.
case closed. :)
If you want to argue about whether god will recognize a certain marriage, that's another topic altogether.
I'm still seeing a flaw in your logic. In your first statement, it's the "church" with the power to determine legal marriage. In your second statement, it's man's job. Please do make up your mind.
my point was that civil unions should be recognized by govt. for the sake of joint tax filings, and any associated tax credits related to that union and the "offspring".
not in this country it doesn't! Marriage is civil institution, under the law. The religious aspect is merely ceremonial, but with no legal weight!
You're advocating a separate, but equal scenario, which is unconstitutional!
The church decides who does and does not get "married"...
A Religious ceremony does not a legal marriage make, you have you get a marriage licence through the state for it to be recognized, allowing you all the benefits of marriage.
Shirley
Who is this G-d you are talking about? Neither the church nor God has any say in what should be recognized as marriage.
Bible thumpers are a$s holes...every last phony one of them.
You must be John's son,which makes you a as$ hole by birth.
"Bible thumpers are a$s holes...every last phony one of them."
Do you have some inside or higher knowledge to make this judgement? It appears that, since you can't live God's commandments, you will just say that there isn't a God so you won't feel guilty. NEWS FLASH. There is a God. He loves us beyond our mortal ability to comprehend. His commandments are given to bring us happiness, peace, and eternal life. Wickedness NEVER was happiness nor does your denial of God make Him non-existant.
So you just made a judgement about an entire group of people. That would make you a ......wait for it....bigot. Also Hypocrite.
Better to be a bible thumper than a A--HOLE bumper
So true, Timm McCain!
True Timm, but we don't need to tell everyone that, they usually find it out for themselves.
hy, do you still love God while you're eating your BLT and shrimp scampi? The same book that you quote also forbade them.
...and you are a far bigger one by your statement, Timmy boy (Timm McCain).
These absurd politicians, most of them int he GOP, are so stupid and self-serving that now they have "revelation" experience and wisdom starts flowing. Even Mr. Portman should be out of politics for being super selfish until now. He will be peaceful anyway, due to clarity in his mind and head. All other GOP politicians should quit their arrogance and incessant abusive practices against the LGBT community or any other "different" folks. The old traits carried forward through their so called generations in America (as they would like to insist upon) are nothing but self-serving and selfish approaches at the cost of hurting others shamelessly. Is Mr. Portman a "hero" now? Why was he a coward for many decades until now in public life? When these politicians start respecting all young people, like they do for their sons and daughters, America will be closer to achieving the place for Life, Liberty and pursuit of Happiness.
Message: Reject all hypocritical politicians, regardless of their Party label. They are the absolute danger for our society. Many of them are in high places with power, including the Supreme Court. These facts make America poor and not healthy.
I still believe dems./libs have the market cornered on being stupid.
its america, you are free to believe anything you want, no matter how stupid. :)
Plenty of idiots of all kinds.
MP-478978: Your comments are ridiculous and ignorant.
RL56
No, the republicans and their lemmings have that all sewn up.
If I said "the party of stupid" would you know who I was talking about? Go ask Bobby Jindal, one of your own.
RL56-YOU just disproved your own theory with one stupid comment-Congratulations!!
I think you are a troller....yup, sure of it.
What Political Person or Actor or any Person of importance would not back Gay Marriage. It would be suicide for their careers not to. Because it is the Cool Thing to do now a days. Who cares what God thinks?? Next thing you know it will be cool to back Child Molesters because they can't help the way they are. They were born that way and they have rights too. And Rob, I think you better re-read the Bible. To God Homosexuality is a Abomination. He loves the Sinner but Hates the Sin!!
no, we won't back child molesters because it is "cool". that's stupid. Child molesters hurt people, gay marriage doesn't.
I think you better re-read a logic book. :)
BTW do you support making EVERY sin illegal? lol, of course not, you're another biblical hypocrite, just wanting to run OTHER people's lives, not your own. :)
There is no such thing as Gay Marriage. The church or god does not recognize such a distastful union.You may get your way but that does not mean people will accept your unholy acts
Concerned - bless your heart, but that argument is getting old. Last time I looked no one had a hotline directly to G-d.
I would point out that, to G-d, divorce is an abomination; eating shellfish is an abomination; wearing cotton-poly blend cloth is an abomination; telling someone you are 5 years younger, or 10 pounds lighter is an abomination; I could go on and on but, no wait... my personal favorite, judging your fellow man and thinking so highly of one's self that they "know the will of G-d" is also an abomination according to the Bible. It is fun to throw rocks at others... I get that. But what happens when others start to see your flaws as a human being and the rocks start to rain down?
well, legally you are wrong. I know that facts hurt you homophobic bigots, but there you go. :)
PS - a majority of americans ALREADY "accept" it, and every day, that percentage grows. It must suck to be you. :)
Personally, I think the divorce rate is distasteful. I also disagree with people wearing a white dress to their second wedding, but who I am to tell someone they can't be divorced...? People grow apart... some should have never married... some are running for their very lives... And then there's the white dress...who am I to judge someone who wants a new beginning and chooses to wear white for their second wedding...?
I find a lot of things "distasteful" and I'm sure that G-d would as well, but I leave that to G-d and try to go about my day to day, living my life. We have such a short trip in the grand scheme of things, why not use it to chase after your own happiness instead of trying to deny others theirs?
Sleeplessinclay,
Re: distasteful unions. How about old Lot's distastful relationship with his daughters? It's claimed he was really drunk, but, if so he couldn't have done the deed once, never mind twice in a row.
Lest not forget God gave free will out of the Love He gives.
"Who cares what God thinks??"
Exactly ! Finally some common sense.
Who is to say that gay marriages will not hurt people? you have no evidence of the long term effect of children being exposed to what i consider a perversion. We still don't have enough data on the effect of gay couples raising children. We certainly have had a few cries from gay children wishing they were raised by both a mother and a father.
Who is to say that it will?
There is no evidence pointing to the opposite either! Besides, why should we care about what you consider a perversion?
Current studies show children raised by gay couples are just as well adjusted as those raised by stright parents.
Current studies still do not havenough data to thoroughly prove they are well adjusted. This whole field of study is relatively new so you can't say they are as well adjusted yet.
So the best argument you can provide is based on a "maybe?" Sorry, but that's not legitimate reason to deny gays the right to marry or raise/adopt children.
Portman's 21-year-old son, who is a junior at Yale University, discussed his sexual orientation with Portman and his wife in 2011, the senator said.
I wonder how tough the son's childhood was, he did not come out until adulthood.
I just think it took a lot of courage, not only to come out, but to an ultra conservative, politician father.
If more kids have the courage to "come out" to their Republican families we will continue to see these "Change of Hearts".
Sodium Chloride, lots of people don't come out until adulthood. Actually 21 is younger than a lot of folks.
So if all his children were heterosexuals then would he still be against gay marriage. Many people who do not have gay members in their family still believe that all people should have the same rights. That is what this issue is all about. Republicans cannot see past their own noses. If it doesn't affect them than they are ignorant of the consequences of their bigotry and ignorance. This applies to global warming, women's rights, health care for the poor etc.
I see Suzbuc made a similar comment. This has been bothering me about Republican "celebrity" cultural figures for a long time. Like Joe Scarborough with gun control and Dick Cheney with gay rights before him, this suddenly makes sense because it affects him personally. Is that the difference between Republicans and Democrats, that Democrats think it's important for you to have rights and opportunities that don't directly have an impact on their own lives?
I'm just disappointed that it takes personal involvement before one of our leaders is able to see that it is the right thing to do. People who are in a position to make laws for everyone should be able to see what is fair and right without having "a dog in the race."
This is America. If 2 people want to make a life time commitment to each other they have that right. It's called a Civil Union. It should hold the same legal rights as Married people have.
This is America, and if 2 PEOPLE want to make a life time commitment to each other, it is there right. ITS CALLED MARRIAGE.
You can't give one set of Americans Civil UNIONS and then the other Marriage. It's called "Separate but "EQUAL". Remember when African Americans went to 'separate but equal' schools, drank from fountains. etc. We saw how that turned out.
MARRIAGE IS A RIGHT FOR ALL Americans. Either everyone can be married, or everyone can be in a civil union.
No one owns the word "marriage". If straights don't want to share it, let THEM change their word. :)
No one owns the word "marriage".
No one owns the word "gay" either but it seems that, instead of this being a positive emotion, it is is now a moral description of a minor group of people.
right, words change over time..either in common usage or by legal change.
PS - its not a "moral description", its a description of sexual orientation.
"PS - its not a "moral description", its a description of sexual orientation."
That is the most ridiculous statement I have read for awhile. You are discounting the huge number of people who accept the Bible and believe it is the word of God. It is clearly a moral issue to them and to their God. It doesn't make any sense, nor is it fair, to diminish and/or ignore the beliefs of others by saying their feelings and beliefs don't count while yours does.
sorry, you're wrong. The word "gay" merely means homosexual. It doesn't imply a morality either way.
I'm not discounting anyone. If THEY want to attach a moral significance to a particular word, fine, but the word, by itself, has no morality. Just google the definition if you don't believe me. :)
It's about time, are you okay with me marrying five woman, two men, a dog and a cat? You the gay lobbyist are trying to force your lifestyle on all of us, we are not saying that you can't do anything, screw a lamp post if that is what you want to do, don't ask me to agree with it. You are trying to make everyone else believe what you believe, I think you are wrong so do not force me to accept gay marriage, it is against my beliefs.
Fine HY41...........use 'gay' anyway you want. Won't bother me a bit. If it does you, then that is your issue.
barry: stupid post. OF COURSE you are saying they can't do something, you are saying they can't marry, by voting against it.
clue for the clueless: no one is "forcing a lifestyle" on you (Lol, are they trying to force you to marry a gay person?), no one can make you "accept" anything.
just get out of the way of equal rights. Its quite simple.
No, gay still refers to happy, just like the Gay Nineties, or Gayly skipping down the street.
Thanks to Barry and his dumb slippery slope argument we'll have to go down the road of informed consent once again.
Nah I don't feel like doing this again, use google !
At least Hy41 bring some refreshing new argument, thanks to him I have discovered a new level of stupidity.
I was taught that you needed an IQ of at least 40 just to be able to walk upright. I guess they were wrong about that.
Jo-3665773
Thanks to President OBAMA all americans will be able to receive their equal rights. Plain and simple.
Yes, use GOOGLE. A company that supports gay rights.
P.S. Use the IQ to see what is LEGAL and now what is "Religious Doctrine"
hy, since you keep injecting God and the Bible into every comment, I'm going to go off topic for just a minute. I take it you favor prayer in school. If you do, do you also think Muslim, Jewish and Hindi people are entitled to the same rights?
Barry Sotero
Im ignoring the comment on polygamy. Dogs/Cats? Do you speak their language? Here I thought marriage was about 'consent'. I didnt realize PETS can give consent to be married.....
LOL I am NOT FORCING you to accept anything. I am standing for EQUAL RIGHTS For ALL Americans. If you don't like gay marriage, fine, don't get IN ONE. But you're 'not liking' of gay marriage, is NOT a reason to PREVENT EQUAL Marriage rights, period.
P.S. Stay away from my pets....
ItsAboutTime,
"LOL I am NOT FORCING you to accept anything. I am standing for EQUAL RIGHTS For ALL Americans. If you don't like gay marriage, fine, don't get IN ONE. But you're 'not liking' of gay marriage, is NOT a reason to PREVENT EQUAL Marriage rights, period."
Now you know that's falsehoods your putting out there.
There Christians being forced by states to do business with gays by photo shooting their ceremonies, baking cakes for them, renting facilities, etc.
Also, if anyone besides Christians says a negative thing about gays, they are harassed by liberal media, have their jobs threatened if not taken away, and are castigated and marginalized.
Either you sir are lying in that statement or you are just plain ignorant of the facts and naive.
Do a Bing search of 'Christians in America persecuted' and tell me what you find if you are an honest man.
The government should grant "Civil Unions" with all the rights of marriage. But to call it a religious term, that is anti religious, has a bad smell to it. Religion teaches against the gay lifestyle, but gays want to use the religious term to condone their anti religious desires.
Sounds like you've confused marriage with "holy matrimony", and are also opposed to the religious freedom of Episcopalians.
Not all Christians are dumb bigots like you.
Except marriage is not a religious term. It's a legal term with a legal definition and applications.
Not everyone is religious or follows your religion. Nor does your religion make or have any say in our secular laws!
-deleted-
Republicans, the cause of virtually all that is wrong with this nation since the cabol that murdered the Kennedys and the leaders of the civil rights movement half a century ago. The decline of American standards and that timeline of republican "leadership" is exactly the same and the inverse of the wealth of the rich and greedy right wing criminals who would lead you to the slaughter house if they could profit from your demise.
Seek professional help.
mr opinionedsob:
OMG. You are a sick and demented human being.Your post is dripping with so much hate and loathing and is so vile and twisted that it makes me nervous, I just hope you do not live anywhere near me or a loved one. You sound like YOU are a half a step away from climbing a bell tower with a high powered rifle to murder folks that you THINK are threating you. I don't support weapons ban as a rule but in your case, I certainly hope you don't have access to anything but a butter knife. The post by john smith69 was right; GET PROFESSIONAL HELP.
Nope opinionated, just "the party of stupid".
mr cobol, while opinionated's statement was over the top, I have seen plenty from the right that were every bit as hateful, but you only pick out the one from a liberal.
...and History will point out that the Democrats brought you the KKK.
Homie
Those Democrats became Republicans when their party supported civil rights. Racist Democrats like Strom Thurmond and the Democrats who participated in the KKK left the Democratic Party where they could continue to fight for Jim Crow laws and oppose integration and voter rights. The fact is that civil rights drove CONSERVATIVE Democrats out of the party and civil rights attracted PROGRESSIVE (LIBERAL) Republicans to the Democratic Party.
Opinionated sob hit the nail on the head, too bad we couldnt put a nail in every republicans head.
Don tell that to Sen. Larry Byrd, of WV. He was more then just a member. It was the consertives that pushed for civil rights, and finally got the Democrats to join in.
How sad that you have to wait till your child comes out before you agree to let gays get married. I can only hope that all the biggest as*holes have children that are gay. Every one deserves to live and love who they choose. And for all you freaks " Catholics " Stop sexually abusing little boys and let your priest meet a grown men and live a normal life. and stop masturbating in the confessionals. If you are human you have sex !!! Even if you are a sick bastard priest !!! And for the new disgusting Pope WHO CARES !!! you are nothing but another man with and opinion That SUCKS !! Ignorant ! where do you masturbate ????
I'll bet you butthole is big enough to slide a can of Budweiser into. Your gay opinion means nothing you sick freak.
Steve, you make me think about a line from Deliverance, "Boy he sure does have purdy lips"
Another ranting left wing hater.
Next.
@Mark
It's a conundrum isn't it. I love it when ones chickens come home to roost. It's too bad it took something like this to drag that tool into the 21st century.
There are so many staunch GOP's with gay children. They figure out their way to deal with it, just like everyone else. Sure it must be tough, I'm sure some of them try hard to ignore the situation (Cheney) until you come around. You also learn to open your mind and maybe you learn something to move forward as a compassionate human being in the world. Also, there are alot of people that say they wouldn't allow gay children in their house. You know how you raised those kids and if they found love, you should be happy and learn to adjust for their sake.
Rights don't matter until they matter to you. How these people can go through most of their lives without developing the ability to empathize - to simply understand how others feel - is utterly confounding. Now that's a choice.
Physicist-retired - Thanks for a great post!
I think it's mostly religious bigots. They don't develop the ability to empathize because they justify whatever they want while interpreting the silly bible and then they block all reason out. And that's done over and over again...crazy to think so many people are so small minded in this day and age.
But then, that is how most belief begins. Some psychopath justifying their immorality to their followers.
Actually it is common sense, logic, and wisdom that are the compelling reasoning tools to know that gay is wrong. His son is gay so he changed his position. I can understand his personal position however one just does not change their mind in a heart beat. I would feel terrible if it happened to my son, however my view would not change.
Amen - P cartier!!! My stepdaughter "came out" about a year ago. While I still love her, I have not budged on my beliefs that gay/lesbian lifestyle is immoral. My step-daughter is still welcome in my house at any time, but I have told her that she will need to keep her improper relationship out of my house/sight. If there is ever a "gay marriage" I will not attend, and I pray each day that she will reverse her course and turn to God.
"me son become communist, so I become communist" "me son become drug addict, so I become drug addict" "me son is so stupid, so I become stupid" ...an on, an on....Because his son was raped in the dorm of Yale an accept be a female from other male or because his son learn this from his "father" (in the closet) and want to talk in public this issue if he don't accept him force him to "accept" ?
It'd be nice if a few Republicans had a kid that couldn't find work and had to live hand to mouth, and suffer through having to ask for a hand. But that would never happen. They have been so entrenched with the "silver spoon complex" that those kids would never feel how much of America feels every month when the bills come due.
What?
All but sociopaths, psychopaths and narcissists lack the ability to naturally empathize.
For the rest of us, we are biochemically programmed to crave the oxytocin our brain releases when we are trusted, appreciated, make others happy and get to share in their happiness. It is what makes us social creatures able to cooperate and form cohesive societies which was the key to our survival as a species. It is what forms the basis of our "conscience". We literally feel "warm & fuzzy" inside when we do something good for someone, or treat them kindly and with understanding and see them respond in kind.
But, we can have this natural ability desensitized. Anger, fear, hatred and regressing into a surival mode where oxytocin is overcome by other chemicals like adreneline, testosterone, cortizol. Look no further than how you get when you are in traffic, rushing to the hospital where you just learned your child has been sent. You do not give a SH*T about anyone else at that moment. Your guts are all twisted up, heart is racing, bile rising, blood rushing to your head. Well that is the SAME feeling a bigot gets when he sees another human being he hates, feels angry with, believes is a threat to him.
And throughout history, psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists who are intelligent have figured out that if they get people who are otherwise, empathetic, good hearted, kindly to feel afraid ALL THE TIME, to feel outraged, threatened by an "Enemy" an "Other", they can literally get people to disassociate from their empathy completely at best or suppress it while using the bigoted philosophy as an excuse or just be so scared of being bullied too, they stay silent and let atrocities happen while their conscience rages.
baco78, whaaaat?
Are you saying he said he was gay ? Cause I sure did not read that in the article.
Or you are just trolling.
John, that is because we brought up our kids to take responsibility for themselves. When laid off within a week got another one.