Why supporting gay marriage means splitting the country

It's my opinion. How did I claim my opinion as anything other than that? Geez!

 

So you both admit you understand that being gay is just human nature and not a choice but still insist they live in shadows and your attitude/opinion will not change..........and you think that's right. I wonder if you are good christians and if you realize THAT is a choice. You're not born christian, you have to be carefully taught (as the song goes).

 

It's the law. Win an election, appoint 9 theocratic leaning justices and overturn it. Short of that you might want to try an ex-pat enclave in Saudi Arabia. Of course that presents other problems.

 

It's not an opinion, you're wrong. Just pointing that out so you see it and maybe change your opinion. Lot of people don't know they're wrong till someone points it out.

 

This issue is dead. Few people under the age of 40 give a damn about it, and more will follow.

The fact that conservatives have been willing to stand by and allow crony capitalism to reign free for the sake of preserving these ideas is insane to me. Apparently, Jesus chased out the gays from the temple, not the money lenders...

Not to be a jerk, but you really need to examine your ethical system if you have considered gay marriage to be more important than corruption and crony capitalism.

I say this as a fellow righty. There are priorities that have real consequences for the way people live, and this isn't one of them.

 

It is an opinion...granted whether right or wrong it's still my opinion. No need to get so uptight because of something I tend to think. And btw when did I ever say I hated Gays? (because that's how you are painting me). Simply because I see things different than you..

 

To be clear, I don't think you hate gays. I think you "accept" gays......as long as they stay in the shadows.......that's wrong.

 

George Wallace said the same thing.




​

 

Don't claim to read my mind please. One of my best friends was Gay. I still miss him.

 

People change as they get older, and even the young tend to get older.

How do you figure that conservatives are willing to stand by and allow crony capitalism? George Bush left office with numbers so low that he couldn't even show his face or McCain would have lost even worse than he did. He couldn't do it with Romney four years later, and of course Jeb wasn't even in the running for the primaries.

We know what Bush did, and we know that Obama has doubled down on that. You think poor people got all that QE money? No, it was the bankers and wall street. How many conservatives do you know that think QE is the greatest invention since the poptart? There's a whole slew of them on the other side of the aisle that do.

Which is why this gay marriage thing is a democrat issue. It's their baby, and they have made it important. There certainly are priorities, and gays are not on that list.

 

As if either ethics or corruption could have meaning to anyone who thinks humans are nothing but glorified robots.

 

If the spirit of the argument is that a marriage is defined by two people forming a household - perhaps to raise a child together - then it isn't a gay issue at all. A widow who is working can support her unwed daughter and grandchild - and everyone would be in the exact same roll as a traditional marriage partnership (sans sex). Whats the difference between that scenario and two lesbians raising a child together? How about a single adult moving in with a parent? Why isn't that a marriage? How about a guy and his dog? Looks like marriage to me!

Probably the government ought to get out of the marriage business all together. Leave it to the religious institutions, as it is already 6000 years old.

 

Yet a surprising number of conservatives are in support of ssm. The split to be concerned about is the split happening in the republican party on issues like ssm.

 

You need to do a little more research on religious acceptance of same sex marriage. All the numbers in each of the major denominations and each of the religions in the US are moving in one direction statistically. You cannot find a faith or denomination that is not more accepting of same sex marriage now, than they were one or two decades ago. The only difference between 'liberal' and conservative faiths is where they started from and how slowly or quickly the numbers have been moving. The direction of the movement is all going one way. That is because people like you are dying out and being replaced with younger, less homophobic versions of 'you'

Basically If you are under 35, you are less likely to spend hours sitting in pews listening to pastors and priests quote Leviticus, and you are more likely to know a same sex couple or two and have them over for dinner. If you are under 35, you just don't care if the dinosaurs that you see, can't handle the 'icky sex' thoughts that Alex and Ward, wearing wedding bands, brings into their half- senile imaginations.

We aren't waiting for you folks to die off, or grow up. We are getting equality now.

 

Gay marriage is a good thing for America. In fact, if we could get OFF of 'sex' as a political issue about now... that would be great.

 

Get rid of the first sentence, and no problemo.

 

People do change as they get older, but I highly doubt they will change on this issue. You would have to make some very strong arguments about the harmful effects of homosexuality before I would even consider it.

Yet McCain and Romney were your nominees. You guys had one actual conservative run for the nomination in the last 8 years (RP), and he barely had a pulse during the Republican primaries, over the long haul. The Republicans then looked to Jeb and Marco to save them. Only after Trump became an existential threat to the Republicans did they support Cruz, who will certainly cave on everything if he is nominated. Kasich? SAME. The bible thumpers will elect anyone that promises to ban abortion and fight gay marriage, which really pisses me off considering where they fall on our list of priorities. .

I understand the meaning of words and that certain actions have consequences. I don't need to believe in magical faerie energy to accomplish that.

 

That being said, I purposely live in a town that is about 95% white. How come the government can install "low income" blacks in my town. Where's my freedom of association?

 

Where's your sense of 'humanity'?

Goodbye.

 

Dogs you are risking while supporting gay marriages, recollecting the past and waking up the old hatred!

 

How does the government "instal" people? What he said makes no sense.

The strange truth is that in strictly white self-segregated areas the social assumptions about service jobs are even higher than elsewhere. They despise white people that do menial labor even more than they despise brown people. They challenge their sense of inherited superiority where non-whites support it. But most businesses can't afford to transport their lawn workers and dish washers from 100 miles away, and no one wants to pay taxes for a public transportation system that would encompass that wide an area. And there is no way the workers can afford it on federal minimum wage.

So most local governments realize than in a completely practical sense they need a low income residential area. And there is this intentionally ignorant persons gripe.

 

Your freedom of association is your freedom not to associate with someone. It means you don't have to say good morning to someone who lives in the same building if you don't want to. It doesn't mean you get to choose who lives in your building, much less your town, unless you personally own all the property in it.

 

Lol...Cons would never budge on civil rights. Cons would never budge on equal rights for women. Cons would never budge on inter-racial marriage. Cons will never budge on gay marriage.
G'wan tell us another one.
Reactionaries never want to budge on anything but since they are on the wrong side of history, their intransigence is essentially impotent posturing.

 

Lol...There is no problemo. Kicking bigots to the curb is the right thing to do.

 

This is not happening at the behest of the community--this is an attempt by the government to force inclusion, and it isn't happening because of natural market forces. I think people should be able to self-segregate if they want to, based on any given set of parameters. Yes, it creates a more divided society, but let people do what they will.

I agree with your assessment of upper-class whites and how they behave toward their own less fortunate brethren--they're nasty little (*)(*)(*)(*)s with no sense of solidarity. Like most people, they like to distinguish themselves as better than others and don't want to be reminded of the fact that the differences are more minor than they believe. Unfortunately, this is how humans all over the world operate. The Chinese treat their lower classes like crap, too.

The real solution is to eliminate most zoning laws, which leads to more urbanization and inclusion (this isn't my goal, but this is what would happen).

Class warfare has always been here and always will be. Do whatever it takes to make it and don't worry about anyone else but your self.

He's referring to the use of government subsidies to force inclusion.