Defending the Truth
Articles | Interviews | Politicians | Groups | Arcade | Experience | Donate
  Defending the Truth > Political Issues > Gay Marriage

Gay Marriage Debate and defend your political beliefs as to whether or not marriage should be only defined as a union between a man and a woman.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-31-2007, 01:19 PM   #1 (permalink)
SIMPLETON
Premium Member
 
fxashun's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my skin
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,897
Country:
Points: 25,503, Level: 96
Points: 25,503, Level: 96 Points: 25,503, Level: 96 Points: 25,503, Level: 96
Level up: 16%, 847 Points needed
Level up: 16% Level up: 16% Level up: 16%
Activity: 35%
Activity: 35% Activity: 35% Activity: 35%
fxashun is offline
Reply With Quote
Unfairness in FLA
Jacksonville.com

the proposed amendment "protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

As with my state, this looks like it would ban civil unions and marriage.....I would not support this. I hope it does not pass as it is written.
Sponsored Links
Old 07-31-2007, 02:35 PM   #2 (permalink)
Council Member
 
forester814's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago 'burbs
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,396
Country:
Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Level up: 73%, 111 Points needed
Level up: 73% Level up: 73% Level up: 73%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
Send a message via Yahoo to forester814
forester814 is offline
Reply With Quote
Thumbs down
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxashun View Post
Jacksonville.com

the proposed amendment "protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

As with my state, this looks like it would ban civil unions and marriage.....I would not support this. I hope it does not pass as it is written.
Thanks again for your opposition to this discriminatory measure, fx.

As you may know, a number of other states have written amendments that preclude civil unions for gays, along with the marriage ban. (All of them, except for the one in Arizona in 2006, were approved by the voters.)

I have a theory as to why they are being written this way.

I believe the language of this amendment, specifically the exclusion of all unions "like" marriage, was chosen by the neo-conservative authors NOT to make sure it passes, but specifically to make sure it eventually gets rejected as unconstitutional and thrown out (after a few election cycles with it in the spotlight).

Why? Doesn't that seem self-defeating?
Not at all.

That way, they can draft a newly worded amendment and start the process all over again, using the issue over a couple more election cycles as a way to flog the all-important massive block of "moral values" voters into turning out on election day.

Much like the abortion issue, Republicans don't want this issue settled... ever.

If these two issues were ever settled, what polarizing wedge issue would they be able to use in order to turn out those "moral values" voters with?

How could they possibly win without a wedge?
Certainly not by running on their records.
Old 07-31-2007, 02:39 PM   #3 (permalink)
Moderator
Moderator
 
highway80west's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,015
Country:
Points: 19,503, Level: 88
Points: 19,503, Level: 88 Points: 19,503, Level: 88 Points: 19,503, Level: 88
Level up: 31%, 347 Points needed
Level up: 31% Level up: 31% Level up: 31%
Activity: 45%
Activity: 45% Activity: 45% Activity: 45%
highway80west is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by forester814 View Post
Thanks again for your opposition to this discriminatory measure, fx.

As you may know, a number of other states have written amendments that preclude civil unions for gays, along with the marriage ban. (All of them, except for the one in Arizona in 2006, were approved by the voters.)

I have a theory as to why they are being written this way.

I believe the language of this amendment, specifically the exclusion of all unions "like" marriage, was chosen by the neo-conservative authors NOT to make sure it passes, but specifically to make sure it eventually gets rejected as unconstitutional and thrown out (after a few election cycles with it in the spotlight).

Why? Doesn't that seem self-defeating?
Not at all.

That way, they can draft a newly worded amendment and start the process all over again, using the issue over a couple more election cycles as a way to flog the all-important massive block of "moral values" voters into turning out on election day.

Much like the abortion issue, Republicans don't want this issue settled... ever.

If these two issues were ever settled, what polarizing wedge issue would they be able to use in order to turn out those "moral values" voters with?

How could they possibly win without a wedge?
Certainly not by running on their records.
Hi Forester.

Yesterday on DTT, I submitted a post that had a couple of websites on blessing SSM. You probably have not seen them now that you logged on today. Would you want to see that post?
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. Psalm 119:105
Old 07-31-2007, 02:43 PM   #4 (permalink)
Council Member
 
forester814's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago 'burbs
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,396
Country:
Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Level up: 73%, 111 Points needed
Level up: 73% Level up: 73% Level up: 73%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
Send a message via Yahoo to forester814
forester814 is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by highway80west View Post
Hi Forester.

Yesterday on DTT, I submitted a post that had a couple of websites on blessing SSM. You probably have not seen them now that you logged on today. Would you want to see that post?
Hi, Mr. West.
Sure, that would be great.
Old 07-31-2007, 02:46 PM   #5 (permalink)
A Funny Fellow
Premium Member
 
pensacola_niceman's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pensacola, FL
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,668
Country:
Points: 18,359, Level: 86
Points: 18,359, Level: 86 Points: 18,359, Level: 86 Points: 18,359, Level: 86
Level up: 2%, 491 Points needed
Level up: 2% Level up: 2% Level up: 2%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
pensacola_niceman is online now
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by forester814 View Post
Thanks again for your opposition to this discriminatory measure, fx.

As you may know, a number of other states have written amendments that preclude civil unions for gays, along with the marriage ban. (All of them, except for the one in Arizona in 2006, were approved by the voters.)

I have a theory as to why they are being written this way.

I believe the language of this amendment, specifically the exclusion of all unions "like" marriage, was chosen by the neo-conservative authors NOT to make sure it passes, but specifically to make sure it eventually gets rejected as unconstitutional and thrown out (after a few election cycles with it in the spotlight).

Why? Doesn't that seem self-defeating?
Not at all.

That way, they can draft a newly worded amendment and start the process all over again, using the issue over a couple more election cycles as a way to flog the all-important massive block of "moral values" voters into turning out on election day.

Much like the abortion issue, Republicans don't want this issue settled... ever.

If these two issues were ever settled, what polarizing wedge issue would they be able to use in order to turn out those "moral values" voters with?

How could they possibly win without a wedge?
Certainly not by running on their records.
Do you still have plans to move to Tampa?
Old 07-31-2007, 02:49 PM   #6 (permalink)
Council Member
 
forester814's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago 'burbs
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,396
Country:
Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Level up: 73%, 111 Points needed
Level up: 73% Level up: 73% Level up: 73%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
Send a message via Yahoo to forester814
forester814 is offline
Reply With Quote
Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by pensacola_niceman View Post
Do you still have plans to move to Tampa?
Yes, but not immediately.

We are working with a realtor there, looking for just the right place in a very specific area, and we are willing to wait for that to come along, even if it takes several years.

Why do you ask?
Old 07-31-2007, 02:49 PM   #7 (permalink)
Moderator
Moderator
 
highway80west's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,015
Country:
Points: 19,503, Level: 88
Points: 19,503, Level: 88 Points: 19,503, Level: 88 Points: 19,503, Level: 88
Level up: 31%, 347 Points needed
Level up: 31% Level up: 31% Level up: 31%
Activity: 45%
Activity: 45% Activity: 45% Activity: 45%
highway80west is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by forester814 View Post
Hi, Mr. West.
Sure, that would be great.
Okay, here they are. Hope you like them.

Claiming the Blessing

Task Force on Blessing Same Gender Relationships

http://www.defendingthetruth.com/gay...tml#post125382 (Christians suffer workplace discrimination from homosexual activists)
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. Psalm 119:105
Old 07-31-2007, 02:53 PM   #8 (permalink)
A Funny Fellow
Premium Member
 
pensacola_niceman's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pensacola, FL
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,668
Country:
Points: 18,359, Level: 86
Points: 18,359, Level: 86 Points: 18,359, Level: 86 Points: 18,359, Level: 86
Level up: 2%, 491 Points needed
Level up: 2% Level up: 2% Level up: 2%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
pensacola_niceman is online now
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by forester814 View Post
Yes, but not immediately.

We are working with a realtor there, looking for just the right place in a very specific area, and we are willing to wait for that to come along, even if it takes several years.

Why do you ask?
I was wondering if any of the anti-gay legislation being discussed here would hamper your plans to move to Florida.
Old 07-31-2007, 02:57 PM   #9 (permalink)
Council Member
 
forester814's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago 'burbs
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,396
Country:
Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71 Points: 11,939, Level: 71
Level up: 73%, 111 Points needed
Level up: 73% Level up: 73% Level up: 73%
Activity: 34%
Activity: 34% Activity: 34% Activity: 34%
Send a message via Yahoo to forester814
forester814 is offline
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pensacola_niceman View Post
I was wondering if any of the anti-gay legislation being discussed here would hamper your plans to move to Florida.
No, it wouldn't.
Or at least, we won't let it.

And like I said above, if the no gay unions measure passes, it will be overturned. It's possible the whole thing will be played out before we even get there.

We haven't let discrimination affect how we live our lives so far, and moving to Florida definitely would not change our stance on that.
Old 07-31-2007, 03:02 PM   #10 (permalink)
A Funny Fellow
Premium Member
 
pensacola_niceman's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pensacola, FL
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,668
Country:
Points: 18,359, Level: 86
Points: 18,359, Level: 86 Points: 18,359, Level: 86 Points: 18,359, Level: 86
Level up: 2%, 491 Points needed
Level up: 2% Level up: 2% Level up: 2%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
pensacola_niceman is online now
Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by forester814 View Post
No, it wouldn't.
Or at least, we won't let it.

And like I said above, if the no gay unions measure passes, it will be overturned. It's possible the whole thing will be played out before we even get there.

We haven't let discrimination affect how we live our lives so far, and moving to Florida definitely would not change our stance on that.
I think you will enjoy Florida after living in the frigid north. I hope you and Jen find what you are looking for soon.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:35 AM.


 Top Political Sites
Poltical Topsites