Skip Navigation Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team
 

Citizen's Briefing Book Component

LOGIN



FIND AN ISSUE YOU CARE ABOUT



MORE CATEGORIES

Content Starts Here

Idea Detail

3920
Points

Allow Gay Marriage

Please? Everyone that votes no against it is either religous, or hasn't looked at the facts right. If the government is supposed to be made of the smartest people in the country, why can't they allow something as logical as this?
81 Comments  »  Posted by Glen to Additional Issues on 1/13/2009 12:58 PM

Comments

 
hope
1/13/2009 12:58 PM
Either allow marriage for all, or don't formally recognize marriage for anyone, if it such a culturally relative issue.
 
PrismPrez
1/13/2009 1:15 PM
I am not gay but I think there is a simple solution to this. The argument seems to be over the word ''marriage". The gay community has more then its share of creative people. Come up with a new word that means exactly the same thing legally and no one could stop it.
 
Jeanie
1/13/2009 1:18 PM
LOGIC is found in the anatomy of the human being.  If same sexes were meant to marry, their anatomy would accomodate each other.  Your idea is not at all logical.  Put this on the bottom of the totem pole and bury it.
 
Glen
1/13/2009 1:20 PM
Geez Jeanie.
All gay people want is to be able to marry. Marriage isn't just about man and a woman, it's about how much the two love each other.
The definition of marriage doesn't control us, we control the definition.
 
Charfuer
1/13/2009 1:59 PM
Liberty and Justice for ALL
 
Claudia
1/13/2009 2:07 PM
The word PARTNERSHIP can be just as strong as MARRIAGE.
Meaning a commitment to one another without regard to gender or the need to procreate.
If the principles of marriage is what the gay community seeks, government could call and recognize it as PARTNERSHIP if its for tax or adoption purposes.
Two people who really care/love each other and wish to stay together could care less for MARRIAGE. Many in Europe no longer marry but become lifelong partners.
 
Tobiasmoon
1/13/2009 3:04 PM

Government is not made up of the smartest people - the last 8 years should've taught you that.

I am all for gay marriage - I dislike civil unions because it has that, "Separate but Equal" feeling to it.

Jeanie are you suggesting that Heterosexuals do not participate in Oral & anal stimulation/sex???

Hell, my wife and I do and we were allowed to marry. 

OH!!! I know - 2 people of the same gender can't have a child naturally.  That's your next response right?

Well, I had a vasectomy - If my wife and I have children it will be because we adopt, yet we're still allowed to be married.

Let's turn  this around - Republicans shouldn't be allowed to marry. 

1) It's a lifestyle choice

2) It's a lifestyle I don't agree with

3) It teaches children hate and intolerance

Just sayin...

 
Mish
1/13/2009 6:33 PM
Thank you, 'Tobiasmoon'!  Right on point - you rock!
 
Joshua Coker
1/14/2009 6:00 AM
Why not ban marriage for atheists? That's a moral choice some Americans don't agree with.

Why not ban marriage for women who've had an abortion? That's a moral choice some Americans don't agree with.

There will ALWAYS be people who disagree with how you live your life. It doesn't give them the right to deny you equal rights and equal protection under the law.

This is America. Let's start acting like it.
 
teacheremma
1/14/2009 11:49 AM
The word marriage is important.  Civil unions are not enough.  Why?  Because too many legalities are tied up in the notion of marriage, and without the word, there is room for rights to be denied.  Rights such as tax benefits, insurance protections, and hospital visitation.  Not to mention the right to be a parent to your child from the moment of birth.  Either the legal definition of marriage must apply to all, or it should apply to no one.

The alternative, of course, would be to strip marriage of its legal trappings and make it strictly and entirely a religious institution.  That would allow those churches that do not want to include gays and lesbians and marriage would be able to do so, without denying basic rights to their fellow citizens based on sexual orientation.
 
LittleBearNYC
1/14/2009 11:54 AM
Remove the word 'marriage' for all-  if marriage is a religious matter the govt should offer civil unions for all. 
 
jg90049
1/14/2009 11:57 AM
Since the President-elect supported gay marriage as a candidate for the Illinois Senate, isn't it time for him to address the issue with an open mind since he's about to be President of the UNITED States of America?
 
Curt
1/14/2009 12:02 PM
I have some gay friends whose relationships have lasted longer than many of my heterosexuals friends. I do not believe it is anyones right, much less the governments right to dicate who can or cannot marry.
Curt IV
 
K in VA
1/14/2009 12:16 PM
If equality is the ultimate American aim in all things, then full equality for same-sex couples should be pursued vigorously.
 
Kwietman
1/14/2009 1:16 PM
It should be noted that, in this argument, those who feel that civil unions are analagous and equivalent to marriage are proposing, in effect, "separate but equal" status.  This administration, more than any other, should recognize the offensiveness of such practice in the United States.  If the word "marriage" should be of no consequence, then the government must remove all mention of it from ALL civil unions.  If the government wants to continue to sanction marriage as an institution, then all must have the same rights.  There are no legal arguments available that do not originate from a religious point of view, and the United States does not make law based on religious doctrine.
 
CWLangley in NYC
1/14/2009 2:58 PM
KWIETMAN.... You said "the United States does not make law based on religious doctrine", however what you SHOULD have said is "THE UNITED STATES SHOULD NOT MAKE LAW BASED ON RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE", because we all know THEY DO!! But that doesn't make it RIGHT!!

IF everything was done by "MAJORITY RULES", blacks would STILL BE SLAVES, because it certainly was not a popular concept, and almost divided the USA!! Just because a simple majority voted to approve PROP 8 in California, doesn't make it right!

I have gay friends in other countries where "civil unions" are the law for gay couples, and he said that instead of giving them equal rights, it is being used by the opponents to SINGLE THEM OUT as a divisive tool, by specifically identifying them as NOT being married, and therefore less than married!! They are still fighting for the right to MARRY... We don't want "SPECIAL RIGHTS", just EQUAL RIGHTS.
 
JMAC
1/14/2009 2:59 PM
government should not be in the business of "marriage"

it is none of their business period.
 
Tobiasmoon
1/14/2009 3:28 PM
You're right Jmac!  Every marriage ever performed by a church should not be recognized by the government or any other civil agency (Hospitals etc).

All Marriages performed by the government should now be called civil unions.

Every marriage performed by a church would have to be remarried to get any of the benefits or to even be legally married rather than just "Friends with Benefits".
 
Victoria1976
1/14/2009 4:43 PM
I agree with Tobiasmoon except that I'd like to add that most of the people who are against gay marriage are just jealous, angry, and bitter because no one wants to marry them.    
 
Snakeyes
1/14/2009 5:40 PM
You might keep in mind  that some may vote a given issue downward simply because it's not one of their own burning issues, in order to try to move some other issue higher up in the rankings. One shouldn't necessarily take this personally or as a comment that this issue isn't valid.
 
Keeningmoon
1/14/2009 6:08 PM
Personally rather than allow gay marriage, i'd rather the administration abolish the recognition of marriage entirely. Marriage is a completely religious contract, and separation of church and state requires we leave the recognizance and definition entirely to religions. If some religions don't allow gay marriage, that is their practitionors' right; if some religions or denominations of Christianity allow gay marriage, we should respect that as that group's right. i.e., the problem isn't gay marriage, the problem is government even TOUCHING marriage at all. 
 
Nicci
1/14/2009 7:17 PM
K in VA said it best: "If equality is the ultimate American aim in all things, then full equality for same-sex couples should be pursued vigorously."
 
michbostn
1/14/2009 7:49 PM

 I have read all your comments and I am approaching this issue from a unique perspective, I am gay and have a partner for 15 yrs. My twin brother has been married his wife for 20 yrs.

 I also live in MA, where gay marriage is legal. We can legally marry state-wise but not according to the federal government.  It is like having “dual legal standard.”  Filing taxes can be unique. When one fills out a legal application, and the question is “Are you legally married” how should it be answered?

The comments here are quite unique.  I think this an excellent forum to hear ones opinions and/or observations. I believe that the legal aspect has to be separated from the religious one.  One can get a marriage license separate from the religious ceremony. As of the signing on the state license, all federal benefits are granted. The fact you one weds before a Justice of the Peace, allows them full federal recognition.

Should Common Law marriage be recognized as having a federal legal standard?

“Separate but Equal” to me means “Dual legal Standards” 

 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 8:20 PM

Homosexuality is a SEXUAL DISORDER. It is an Addictive Perversion of Normal Human Male-Female Sexuality. DO NOT allow such a Sexual Perversion to DESTROY MARRIAGE and RUIN THE AMERICAN FAMILY

PART 1

As a Society, we attempt to base our LAWS on STANDARDS of HUMAN BEHAVIOR, and on MAJORITY CONSENSES, and when possible, on REASON and SCIENCE.

This Legal tradition is in danger of failing us now in the case of concerted attacks by groups of Homosexual Sexual Addicts - Entire Groups of Homosexuals and Homosexual supporters who constantly seek to Rationalize, and Justify their Sexual Addictions by any and every means possible. Most especially by MANIPULATING Psychological Science, the Mass Media, Education, AND THE LAW ITSELF to provide unwavering support for their addictive sexual perversions and disorders.

The following website provides a useful over view of some of the Typical Defense Mechanisms of the Addictive Personality. ALL of these can be seen in DIRECT and CONSISTENT OPERATION by the "Homosexual Community."

http://www.erikbohlin.net/Handouts/defense_mechanism_addiction.htm

Homosexuality was known (in the vast majority of cases studied >95%) TO BE AN AQUIRED A SEXUAL BEHAVIORAL DISORDER - A TREATABLE and REPAIRABLE Disorder, and it was correctly DEFINED as such right up until about 1973 -75 (1) when SEVERAL PRACTICING HOMOSEXUALS gained control of the American Psychiatric Association, and then the American Psychological Association, and PURPOSEFULLY RE-DEFINED Homosexuality so that it was "No Longer a Disorder." The definition was abhorrent to their Addiction, and rather than RESOLVE AND CORRECT THEIR DESTRUCTIVE AND ADDICTIVE BEHAVIORS - THEY WENT TO WORK TO CHANGE THE "OFFENSIVE" DEFINITIONS, and subsequently organized to GAIN CONTROL OF THE MASS MEDIA, EDUCATION, and Key Aspects of the US Government (most especially the Legal Branch thereof.)

Ref: Note #1:

D'Emilio, John. "The Gay Liberation Movement." The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts. Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, eds. Malden, Massachusetts: 2003. 32-37.

In his essay, D'Emilio traces the progression of the gay rights movement. Within his depiction of the history of the gay rights movement, D'Emilio recounts an example of how gay activists protested in the medical community. According to D'Emilio, "Chicago Gay Liberation invaded the 1970 convention of the American Medical Association, while its counterpart in Sand Francisco disrupted the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association." During this event, D'Emilio states that "a young bearded gay man danced around the auditorium in a red dress, while other homosexuals and lesbians scattered in the audience shouted 'Genocide!' and 'Torture!' during the reading of a paper on aversion therapy." The effects of such displays were to "thrust gay liberationists into the public spotlight."

D'Emilio's essay allows us to understand some of the actions of gay activists that led to the removal of homosexuality from the list of disorders. In order to bring about change, there needs to be a strong enough opposition to the current situation. In this case, the gay rights activists used protest during the medical convention to force the psychologists to question their views and their methods of treatment. The actions of the gay rights movement gave an opportunity for those who support the cause to come into the public spotlight, and the increase of attention to the matter forced the ApA and other medical organizations to question the validity of the classification of homosexuality as a disorder.

End Ref. Note #1

End Part 1...  SEE PART 2

 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 8:23 PM
PART 2

Substantial work and volumes of detailed studies were done by many eminent and fair minded Psychological Scientists, and Psychiatric Medical Doctors on the Topic of Homosexuality AS A SEXUAL AND BEHAVIORAL DISORDER.

Here are Two Excellent Examples that are a MUST READ to Know the TRUTH about Homosexual Addiction and Behavioral Disorder.

Ref Note #2

Bergler, Edmund. Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life? New York: Hill & Wang, 1957.

Dr. Edmund Bergler believes that homosexuality is not a way of life, but rather a "neurotic disease in which extremely severe and unavoidable self-damaging tendencies engulf the whole personality". He asserts that it homosexuality is caused by an "unsolved masochistic conflict with the mother of earliest infancy" (291, 263). Bergler also states and stresses that homosexuality can be cured because it is not an innate characteristic, but rather a psychological disease.

Bergler's book exemplifies the medical field's view of homosexuality during the mid twentieth century. Berger theories differ from his contemporaries who shared his opinion because he urged that homosexuality should be publicized, rather than silenced, to expose the non-glamour factor of being a diseased homosexual and deter indivudals from homosexual b

Caprio, Frank S. Female Homosexuality: A Modern Study of Lesbianism. New York: Grove Press, 1954.

Similar to Edmund Bergler, Frank Caprio states that homosexuality is a disease that could be prevented and treated through therapeutic management. He uses clinical data and case theories to support his theories on the psychogenisis of female homosexuality. Most importantly, Caprio believes that he has the authority to make generalizations about homosexuals and separate the truths from the untruths regarding homosexuality. He discredits the following myths: that lesbians are born lesbians and cannot be cured, and stresses that "lesbianism is acquired, not congenital or inherited, and represents the behavior symptom of a deep seated and unresolved neurosis" (13). Therefore, homosexuality is a psychological disease rather than biological with genetic origins, an attitude shared by many of his contemporaries in the mid twentieth century

End Ref Note #2.

End Part  2 SEE PART 3

 
chrispl
1/14/2009 8:29 PM
So, this lady named Jeanie believes a narrow view, with that narrow view, one would think she also means if a hetro couple can't have kids, well then they have no right to marry either??! Please, grow up lady, not everyone wants kids, adults want to love another adult in what is equal and fair....marriage for all adults.
 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 8:33 PM
PART 3

NUMEROUS IMPORTANT SCIENTIFIC STUDIES WORKS (just such as these two above) WHICH SHOW HOMOSEXUALITY FOR THE ADDICTIVE SEXUAL DISORDER THAT IT REALLY IS HAVE BEEN DERIDED, MINIMIZED, AND WHEN EVER POSSIBLE LIED ABOUT so as to Deny and Falsify the TRUTHS that they so clearly present. This is NOT "Good Science" but Rather the CONTROL OF SCIENCE MADE TO FIT POLITICAL AND SOCIAL AGENDAS WHICH SUPPORT HOMOSEXUAL ADDICTION AND DISORDER.

The inescapable TRUTHS of Scientific Works such as these have been withheld from our Brightest Young Minds. INSTEAD Our young Students - children in most cases - are having their Minds POISONED by the CONSISTENTLY PRO-HOMOSEXUAL EDUCATIONAL AGENDAS in Western Universities and Public Schools. These Academic institutions are now virtually UNIFORMLY CONTROLLED by a Pro-Homosexual Elite who in many ways seem to act as Liberal "Neo-Fascists" in that that attempt to strictly control and influence WHAT and HOW their Students think, to include their Moral Values as to "Right and Wrong Behaviors, RATHER THAN TEACHING THERE STUDENTS HOW TO ANALYZE AND THINK RATIONALLY AND INDEPENDENTLY FOR THEMSELVES.

I have first hand knowledge as to exactly how MUCH these people are beginning to control and influence our Children. RIGHT NOW, this VERY DAY, when you walk down the Halls of virtually ANY HIGH SCHOOL IN AMERICA you will WITNESS almost as many Homosexual Acts in progress in the HALLWAYS - Girls kissing / "Making Out with" and Fondling OTHER GIRLS as you will Normal Boy-Girl Heterosexual Acts. Why is that??? Are children "SOMEHOW" magically being BORN THIS WAY NOW???

OR ARE WE ACTIVELY TEACHING THEM TO ENGAGE IN HOMOSEXUAL ADDICTIONS.

I would strongly argue that THAT is the Case. Our Children are CONSTANTLY BOMBARDED BY PRO-HOMOSEXUAL MESAGES FROM TV, MOVIES, EDUCATORS, and EVEN Children's Books, and now from Science Fiction and Fantasy Books.

The Facts or this matter are simple. As Mammals we exist as Males and Females, and the NORMAL Sexual behaviour is for Sexuality to exist exclusively between Males and Females. We are "Hardwired" for this event to be "Pleasurable" to encourage reproduction, and LONG TERM FAMILY STRUCTURES so that Our Children have VIABLE MALE AND FEMAL ROLE MODELS when growing up through their formative years. Because SEX affects the PLEASURE CENTERS of the Human Brain, it can become ADDICTIVE... and it is prone to perversion and disorder.

Homosexuality is a BEHAVIOR - an aberrant sexual DISORDER and IT MUST ONCE AGAIN BE TREATED AS SUCH, and NOT SUPPORTED or "PROTECTED" in any way - No more than we would any other Destructive Addictive Behavior like Drugs, Alcohol, or Gambling. Homosexuality is a DESTRUCTIVE SEXUAL DISORDER which strips away the fundamental functions of Human Male-Female Sexuality, and reduces it's VICTIMS to Less than Lustful Rutting Animals - Animals controlled by our lowest sexual addictions, doomed to live in self loathing, self-demeaning lifestyles.

PLEASE, STOP THIS MADDNES NOW!  Enforce the FCC DECENCEY LAWS. REMOVE THE PRO-HOMOSEXUAL MESAGES FROM OUR NATIONS TV's, MOVIES, and EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS WHILE WE STILL CAN. STOP THE BRAIN WASHING OF AMERICAN CHILDREN TO "ACCEPT HOMOSEXUALITY" as "NORMAL" when clearly IT IS NOT.

I put it to you Mr. President. IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT FOR AMERICAS CHILDREN? FOR AMERICAS FUTURE.

A very wise and wonderful man once said... YE SHALL KNOW THE TRUTH, AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.

Perhaps he knew something that we have forgotten...

 
chrispl
1/14/2009 8:54 PM
I think "Darkmagnetics" is a very hateful and miserable person. God bless us all !
 
Kevin J. Kauth
1/14/2009 9:03 PM
The answer isn't to redefine marriage but to replace the legal term "marriage" with a non religious one.  Most people opposed to gay marriage are not opposed to equal rights under the law, they just like the word marriage to have a particular definition.  
 
Waybo
1/14/2009 9:04 PM
Mr. President-Elect --

Please give gay Americans the wonderful gift of marriage that you and Michelle enjoy every day.  We are counting on you.
 
Kevin J. Kauth
1/14/2009 9:08 PM
and darkmagnetics lives in an age when fertility mattered allot more, wow.  Even if it is an addiction, even if it is aquired, even if it is a choice, which i'm not conceding;  the government should not ever interfear with the choices of its citizens that affect only themselves, even if those choices are horrible.
 
Mish
1/14/2009 9:13 PM
@ Kevin J. Kauth
People like Darkmagnetics should not be allowed to reproduce.
 
Toby Adams
1/14/2009 9:45 PM
The word marriage is important; it has meaning. Denying the civil rights and the social recognition that comes with marriage to one group of people is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Changing the word is not the answer. Same-sex couples who want to get married want to get MARRIED, not some other word. Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex people are all cut out of marriage because of who they are, because of religious ideas that have no place in our government. Churches should decided who THEY want to perform ceremonies for, and Government should provide equal rights to all. THAT is called SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 10:02 PM
 Defense Mechanisms of the Addictive Personality

Part 1

This information is NOT presented to be accusing or “hurtful” in any way. It is NOT AN ATTACK. It is presented to be STRONGLY HELPFUL for ANY one who feels the PAIN of their addictions, and who wishes to BEGIN to seek a way OUT of the Terrible and Destructive CONTROL that these have over their Lives.

Addicts have an accounting system that justifies why they don’t have a problem. The addict will spend the counseling hour telling you why they don’t have an addiction, while the person who struggles with it less is more open to the idea that they could have an addiction. The addict holds up a picture of what they would be like if they were a 'true' addict. “

Denying – There is not problem. The problem lies outside the person’s conscious awareness, or they refuse to admit it and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.
Alcoholic: “I am not an alcoholic. I don’t know what you are talking about.”
Homosexual: Homosexually is "Good" is "Normal" is "Natural" I was BORN a homosexual. I CAN NOT CHANGE.

Lying - We lie, distort the truth, leave out important details.
General: “I don’t really have that much of a problem.”
Homosexual: To Others:  I am NOT a Homosexual.  To SELF: Homosexually is "Good" is "Normal" is "Natural" I was BORN a homosexual. I CAN NOT CHANGE. (Lying is Denying) “I LIKE being a Homosexual."  "It's OK to BE GAY"  (See. It EVEN RHYMS.)

Manipulation - We argue, tease, mock, become silent, cry, etc. when confronted about the problem.
Sexaholic: Pouts, complains, “makes” others feel guilty. THEY are the Victim
Homosexual - CONTROL the ApA, CONTROL the MEDIA, CONTROL the EDUCATION SYSTEM, CONTROL the GOVERNMENT. CONTROL FREEDOM OF SPEECH - Define any antagonistic comments as "Hate Speech." Find every way I can to RE-MAKE Society to FIT AND APPROVE OF MY ADDICTION. 

Accusing - Attacking the person and pointing out there problems.
General: “Well, you have problems too.” “You lie as well.”
Alcoholic: “You drink yourself.” “You are just overly sensitive because your mother drank.” “You think everyone is an alcoholic.”
Sexaholic: “You are cheating on me.” [to deflect attention off of themselves]
Homosexual - You are Taking Away my RIGHTS. YOU ARE A HATEFUL PERSON. You are Guilty of “HATE SPEACH”

End of Part 1

 
Tobiasmoon
1/14/2009 10:39 PM
Dark, You should be able to spout your hatred - No one should take that from you.  Ever.

However, we also have the right to ignore you as the minor distraction you are.  Bring forth a realistic non faith based (Read Scientific) response otherwise, don't be upset when we dismiss you for your tiny views.
 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 10:45 PM
Defense Mechanisms of the Addictive Personality

Part 2


Threatening - Using threats to make the person stop talking about the Addictive problem
Judging – Being Judgmental of others who point out the Addictive Behaviors
Projecting – Pointing Out the Problems of the Person who is seeking to help the addict escape Denial, or Accusing THEM of Having “The Problem” rather than face their own Destructive Behaviors.
Blaming - Making others responsible for one’s Addiction and Addictive Behaviors
Humor - We make light of the situation and turn it into a joke.
Intellectualizing -  The use of an “accounting system” or False Logic to demonstrate that "are not an Addict."
Rationalizing - (See Intellectualizing)Mental Self Talk that equates to "I don't have a problem." or "This Behavior is actually OK, or not really as bad as they say it is."
Silence – Being quiet and withdrawn. Unreachable.
Withdrawing - We avoid and leave physically or emotionally. Doesn’t respond to questions. (See Silence)
Compliant - Outwardly compliant, while inwardly rebellious, Seething, Angry and Hateful.
Minimizing – Addict Agrees, but makes it a smaller problem than it really is.
Cockiness – Flamboyant “in your Face” behavior. Disregard for Normal or Socially Appropriate Behaviors
Justifying - If you had ___ Happen to YOU, then YOU would behave this way too.
Explaining - Telling a story that is not really accurate and uses false logic to explain. No real remorse, empathy or sorrow.
Analyzing - We come up with excuses, explanations, and defensives that justify our Addictive Behaviors.
Defiance - Using verbal force and stubbornness. Self Destructive Behaviors despite very REAL Consequences.
Attacking - We raise our voices to intimidate. Yelling, screaming, and shouting. Arguing, Name calling, Getting angry.


 

 
Aaron!
1/14/2009 11:03 PM
I consider myself a Christian, and I completely support gay marriage. I shouldn't be able to push my values onto anyone else, and that's certainly not something the government should be doing.
 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 11:04 PM
"Tobiasmoon" , et. al.  nothing presented here has anything to do with "hate" - unless YOU are the one bringing it to the table  - SEE "PROJECTING" and "ATTACKING"

Homosexuals, like all other Addicts, love to argue for their Addictions. 

Perhaps - one day when you have debased yourself enough in your perversions, you will begin to finally realize why they ARE perversions... I hope you will have the good fortune to reach that moment in your Life when you are so sickened by what you have done - sickened enough to escape it forever.

A simple Dictionary would help, if you cared enough about your self to look up the word "Perversion"
Perhaps you will be brave enough to try that some day. 

Calling a "perversion" exactly that - A PERVERSION"   is not "Hate"  ...it is something that YOU apparently NO LONGER RECOGNIZE - It is CALLED The TRUTH.  GET USED TO IT.
 
o76923
1/14/2009 11:11 PM
The APA and WHO have come out reversed their positions on homosexuality and the APA now fully endorses marriage for gays and lesbians.  That ends the science debate on the Issue.

Nobody is advocating the law somehow enable homosexuals bear children.  Nobody is advocating we stop people from getting married to people of the opposite sex.  Nobody wants to turn anyone into a homosexual.  While society has needs for children to be created, there is no compelling need for every individual to be in a procreative relationship.

All that is being asked for is we want our secular government to be secular.
 
Darkmagnetics
1/14/2009 11:28 PM

No, that does NOT end the Science Debate. 

The Scientific Psychological Establish ment  (and Media, and Educational system) has been HiJacked BY Homosexuals. 

once again... The APA was taken over from within by Homosexuals and Homosexual supporters and sympathizers. This was the first part  of a PLANNED movement, Teaching our children - Like "Aaron!" to have a completely confused and backward misunderstanding of what is good, normal and healthy, v.what is sick, perverted, and just plain wrong.

see PART 1 above on HOMOSEXUALITY AS A SEXUAL DISORDER

esp. Ref Note #1

D'Emilio, John. "The Gay Liberation Movement." The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts. Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, eds. Malden, Massachusetts: 2003. 32-37.

In his essay, D'Emilio traces the progression of the gay rights movement. Within his depiction of the history of the gay rights movement, D'Emilio recounts an example of how gay activists protested in the medical community. According to D'Emilio, "Chicago Gay Liberation invaded the 1970 convention of the American Medical Association, while its counterpart in Sand Francisco disrupted the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association." During this event, D'Emilio states that "a young bearded gay man danced around the auditorium in a red dress, while other homosexuals and lesbians scattered in the audience shouted 'Genocide!' and 'Torture!' during the reading of a paper on aversion therapy." The effects of such displays were to "thrust gay liberationists into the public spotlight."

D'Emilio's essay allows us to understand some of the actions of gay activists that led to the removal of homosexuality from the list of disorders. In order to bring about change, there needs to be a strong enough opposition to the current situation. In this case, the gay rights activists used protest during the medical convention to force the psychologists to question their views and their methods of treatment. The actions of the gay rights movement gave an opportunity for those who support the cause to come into the public spotlight, and the increase of attention to the matter forced the ApA and other medical organizations to question the validity of the classification of homosexuality as a disorder.

End Ref. Note #1

 
Love Exile
1/15/2009 12:38 AM
<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->

Mr. President, all we want are civil unions on par with everyone else. Leave marriage (ceremonies) to the religious institutions. Protect us from discrimination. Strengthen our commitments. Love should have no borders. Love should have no hindrances.  One federal law and your stroke of the pen would free up all the resources now currently used by the states, counties, cities, corporations, activist, religions and lawyers working to combat, overturn, interpret, promote, defend and amend the patchwork of state, county and sometimes only city legislation. Please make it happen. Soon, please.

 
JustJohn
1/15/2009 1:56 AM
 Saying everyone who voted against Gay Marriage is wrong is a bit like saying everyone in the parade is out of step but me.  

Its a representative form of government.  It is a State's right to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman and all others are Civil Unions.  

If you think the majority is wrong take it to court.  It is not a Federal issue.
 
Yvon
1/15/2009 6:47 AM
 JustJohn: if it is a State's right to define marriage, are you saying it was ok when State's defined marriage as being between two people of the same race? 

And Darkmagnetics--I won't even address your craziness beyond saying if homosexuals such as myself are addicted to sex (which is just so wrong: after 20+ years with my partner, only the tiniest percentage of our lives has anything to do with sex--love, definitely; sex, not so much)--anyway, if *I* am addicted to sex, you are clearly, clearly paranoid! To say that homosexuals have "hijacked" the scientific psychological establishment is just nuts.

I don't want a "civil union" with my partner--we have been civilly united on our own for more than two decades now, as I've said. And I don't feel the need to be married in a church and go through all that hoopla--all I want are the same protections under the law that are afforded to other people (i.e., heterosexual people): insurance, tax, and inheritance benefits, among other things.
 
JoshWerner
1/15/2009 7:06 AM
Separate church and the state or give all of us equal rights. After the movement in the right direction to elect President Obama, all that historical significance of equal rights for man no matter what the color of their skin is, I don't think it is right that we take steps backward when it comes to gay Americans. We should have equal rights too.
 
JoshWerner
1/15/2009 7:13 AM
And by the way, Dark, this is funny that you're going on about addictions when straight couples themselves are addicted to sex. Spreading HIV and having children they don't want and are not ready for.

Mothers and fathers these days never stay together anymore. They don't get married or they get married and get a divorce because they are sleeping with someone else.

Homosexuality isn't really an addiction in my opinion, but the choice to fall in love with a man. Homosexuality is not solely sex sex sex, at least not any more than being straight. We homosexuals can love too, and whatever you think you're trying to accomplish by labelling my relationship with my lover addiction... well it's not necessary. Your views against homosexual "addiction" isn't wanted and doesn't help our cause to fight for equal rights.
 
noxidereus
1/15/2009 7:45 AM
... and we do not have to come up with a new word for it to placate religious nuts either.
 
zachattack
1/15/2009 8:15 AM
"Seperate but not equal" is not the values of america.

Religious people can do marriages, I couldn't give 2 poops about that, but the government should at least be able to give out the RIGHTS and BENEFITS and MINDSET of being married using legal documents.
The actual ceremony, I think gays and I could care less.

Basically: Allow gay marriage to be legalized, but give the churches the choice to do the ceremony.
Very simple.

Not everyone is Christian or religious you know.
 
jst4horses
1/15/2009 9:00 AM
I am religious, and I still support gay marriage.

I am also a Native American, and we believe that marriage is two bodies, one soul, and Creator uses this union to produce new bodies, which one day will find their other soul half.

However, I still support gay marriage.

I also feel that when the world is so amazingly heavenly for everyone that we have time to argue about whether those who love each other should be able to have a wedding planner and go before their friends and family to announce and commit to their relationship, we can then deal with this issue, and reality being what it is, I think that is a long, long, long way down the road for humans.

Gay marriage is not a huge problem in the world. I think we should permit gay marriage, and encourage ALL marriage to be informed, and live up to its promises.

I have worked many years in divorce law offices, and domestic violence programs where I volunteered, and in emergency room and police dispatching where I have seen marraiges of both kinds end in violence and maiming and death.

I think we have a lot of more serious issues to deal with than harming people who want to declare their committment to each other.

Yes on Gay Marriage, but as Scolia has said, if you want a change at the Federal level, I believe he was talking about abortion or not (another issue that is far down the list in my opinion, feed and educate and house the kids before you demand that they have life inflicted on them) get out of youyr chair and make a bill and push it through. It is not the Court's responsibility to change legislation, it is the responsibility of the People to bring their ideas out and use lawful measures to present their sides and then vote on it.

I personally have never had to deal with either of these issues, but having seen the results of divorce and neglected  children I think the more people who marry and take care of their kids, YAY, and the less kids that are unwanted, YAY as well. I have worked in the locked wards of children who have been so mutilated by their own parents they will never be released from hospital. There are things worse than no life.
 
lodka
1/15/2009 9:10 AM

First of all, there is an attack on couples who choose to have children.  Marriage is about responsibility; about the possibility of producing a biological baby.  No marriage should be about anything other than that.  Only a couple (man and a woman) who chooses to reproduce has there healthy baby stolen at birth.

 
Smaug0829 (LPKY)
1/15/2009 9:13 AM
Marriage should be between a Man and Woman.

I am not religious and consider myself an Agnostic. I do not support Gay Marriage, but i do support civil unions.

Gay couples should NOT be able to adopt. I am not saying that gay couples would not make good parents; but lets face the facts, part of being in a same sex relationship is the inability to conceive children with ones partner.

I also believe that persons are born gay, I have a lesbian aunt, and a few gay friends. I hold nothing agianst them because of their lifestyle.




Subscribe to ideas