AG: Out-of-state gay marriages likely valid in N.M.

Good for you Governor Martinez. I hope that you'll make this a law.

Stand up and say NO to the "Pink Mafia."

another wrote:

<quoted text>
bigot

straight

Can't beleive a kid raised by the late Bruce King
would be for same sex marriage.

It seems that religious people (and X-tians in particular) are quick to forget, "Judge not, lest ye be judged."

It's truly an enigma why X-tians are so concerned with the sex lives of other people. They just can't mind their own business, can they?

Let's play a quick game of "what if."

What if Muslims and Jews decided that no one should eat pork (one of the small things they can agree upon)? Would Christians object to being told they couldn't have ham on Easter or Menudo on New Year's day? Of course they would, because no one should be able to tell them how to live their life.

Maybe a rough parallel, but even the most devout fundaMENTAList should get the picture

I am so glad to see that gay marriages will be accepted legally, but sorry to see that our new Governor is so opposed to equality.
It reminds me of the final days of miscegination.
miscegenation laws, were laws that enforced racial segregation at the level of marriage and intimate relationships by criminalizing interracial marriage and sometimes also sex between members of two different "races". Such laws were first introduced in North-America from the late seventeenth century onwards by several of the Thirteen Colonies, and subsequently by many US states and US territories and remained in force in many US states until 1967. After the Second World War, an increasing number of states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws. In 1967, in Loving v. Virginia, the remaining anti-miscegenation laws were held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. Similar laws were also enforced in Nazi Germany as part of the Nuremberg laws, and in South Africa as part of the system of Apartheid. In the United States, interracial marriage, cohabitation and sex have since 1863 been termed "miscegenation."

Quark wrote:

It seems that religious people (and X-tians in particular) are quick to forget, "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
It's truly an enigma why X-tians are so concerned with the sex lives of other people. They just can't mind their own business, can they?

And religious people also find it an enigma that people like you totally misconstrue and twist what Scripture really says. Your understanding of Matthew 7:1 is completely erroneous.

Divorce rate is now over 50%. Any idea the divorce rate for same sex couples? Any idea how many folks are living together out of wedlock? Any idea how many children are born with unwed mothers? Seems that same sex unions are a minor issue in comparison.

Justice Lover wrote:

I am so glad to see that gay marriages will be accepted legally, but sorry to see that our new Governor is so opposed to equality.
It reminds me of the final days of miscegination.
miscegenation laws, were laws that enforced racial segregation at the level of marriage and intimate relationships by criminalizing interracial marriage and sometimes also sex between members of two different "races". Such laws were first introduced in North-America from the late seventeenth century onwards by several of the Thirteen Colonies, and subsequently by many US states and US territories and remained in force in many US states until 1967. After the Second World War, an increasing number of states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws. In 1967, in Loving v. Virginia, the remaining anti-miscegenation laws were held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. Similar laws were also enforced in Nazi Germany as part of the Nuremberg laws, and in South Africa as part of the system of Apartheid. In the United States, interracial marriage, cohabitation and sex have since 1863 been termed "miscegenation."

Whats not equal? We can ALL mayyr who we want, but NO ONE can marry within the same sex. That sounds equal to me.

I say that instead of legalizing gay marriage, we just ban marriage altogether. Only then can we be sure that no one is tarnishing such an obviously sacred union. It will be equal. You could probably still have a church ceremony, but the government just wouldn't recognize it. No biggie, right?

AAHM wrote:

<quoted text>
dumb

Typical reply from a person who knows they have no legit rebuttal against what I had said. Its equal as it stands. Gays want the right to marry within the same sex that sounds like they want MORE rights!!

MoralsNValues wrote:

Stand up and say NO to the "Pink Mafia."

Loving your spouse and wanting to legally marry makes one part of a "mafia"?

What an odd thought.

Chaos Undercover wrote:

<quoted text>
Typical reply from a person who knows they have no legit rebuttal against what I had said. Its equal as it stands. Gays want the right to marry within the same sex that sounds like they want MORE rights!!

Why?

Straight people have the option to marry for love, and society expects and idealizes that.

Gay people do not have the ability to marry for love.

How is wanting that same ability a "special right"?

Do you believe a loveless mariage of convenience is the same or even preferable to a love match?

If so, I pity your poor spouse.

Chaos Undercover wrote:

<quoted text>
Typical reply from a person who knows they have no legit rebuttal against what I had said. Its equal as it stands. Gays want the right to marry within the same sex that sounds like they want MORE rights!!

to a simpleton.

Jason wrote:

I say that instead of legalizing gay marriage, we just ban marriage altogether. Only then can we be sure that no one is tarnishing such an obviously sacred union. It will be equal. You could probably still have a church ceremony, but the government just wouldn't recognize it. No biggie, right?

Would also lower the divorce rate.

All God-loving, responsible citizens of NM must vote out this apparently "Gaybies"-afflicted Attorney General....or urge their state representatives to adopt a man-woman only constitutional marriage standard.

Chaos Undercover wrote:

<quoted text>
Typical reply from a person who knows they have no legit rebuttal against what I had said. Its equal as it stands. Gays want the right to marry within the same sex that sounds like they want MORE rights!!

You will be receiving those same rights
.
sugar

Rainbow Kid wrote:

<quoted text>
You will be receiving those same rights
.
sugar

Ok rump ranger. I have no desire to look for love in another man hairy &#^! Its disgusting and not natural. Its all about choice. THere is NO such thing as a gay gene.

Chaos Undercover wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok rump ranger. I have no desire to look for love in another man hairy &#^! Its disgusting and not natural. Its all about choice. THere is NO such thing as a gay gene.

gay marriage is exactly like abortion

if you are against it,

simply don't have one.

end of story