Maine Wedding hopes turn to dejection Voters defeat same-sex ma...

Eaglefan9727 wrote:

<quoted text>
And here is a eality check for you. The state migh regonize your play marriages, But there will be people that wont regonize it and you better get use to it. And you have no clue if it will get thwon out, Because it is not the same thing as interracial marriage. Cant compare SSM to IM. They dont even come close.

I don't give a rip if you recognize whether my sweetie are married or not, as long as the GOVERNMENT recognizes it. Maybe we need to start voting on straight marriages, after all you folks have done more harm to your "sacred" institution then any gay couple ever could.

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
Um, seems like you do. Isn't that what you are pushing - mainstream America's recognition of the legitimacy of your "marriage" and your lifestyle?

So is the gay lifestyle any thing like the straight lifestyle?

BTW at what age did YOU make a conscious choice to be straight?

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
Um, seems like you do. Isn't that what you are pushing - mainstream America's recognition of the legitimacy of your "marriage" and your lifestyle?

I care only that my marriage is protected by our laws. Whether or not "mainstream America" recognizes it is irrelevant.

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
Um, seems like you do. Isn't that what you are pushing - mainstream America's recognition of the legitimacy of your "marriage" and your lifestyle?

What you are pushing is to have your pathetic, ignorant antigay prejudice protected from scrutiny -- in your insecurity, it's just too threatening for you to be equal to gay citizens.

You should move to a more gay tolerant state, as provided by Islam,............

Bawney Fwank wrote:

You should move to a more gay tolerant state, as provided by Islam,.........

Typical. This the best you can come up with? No wonder the conservatives lost a safe seat in upstate New York, with morons like you as supporters.

In the rural area I live in, I have found that straight people who are secure in their sexuality and relationships tend to support their gay friends' right to marry. The rest are self-loathing closet cases (and the resentful, unloved people they marry.)

Gryph wrote:

<quoted text>
So is the gay lifestyle any thing like the straight lifestyle?

Yes, I suppose quite a bit of it is. It's the part that isn't that has no right being forced upon mainstream America when they want to have nothing to do with it.

Gryph wrote:

<quoted text>
BTW at what age did YOU make a conscious choice to be straight?

No idea, probably early teens, around the time when I first saw this.
http://blog.photoshelter.com/corp/farrah-fawc...

manwolf wrote:

<quoted text>
What you are pushing is to have your pathetic, ignorant antigay prejudice protected from scrutiny -- in your insecurity, it's just too threatening for you to be equal to gay citizens.

What? I am not anti-gay and I am certainly not ignorant. I have nothing against gay people, but a man should not be allowed to marry another man. It's deviant behavior that is just unacceptable in our society.

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, I suppose quite a bit of it is. It's the part that isn't that has no right being forced upon mainstream America when they want to have nothing to do with it.
<quoted text>
No idea, probably early teens, around the time when I first saw this.
http://blog.photoshelter.com/corp/farrah-fawc...

Not bad, a little skinny for my likes, but I had crushes on females when I was in junior high too. Does that constitute a conscious choice or one that is just our nature?

Did you see males in the same vein as you saw her?
I know I wasn't turned on by males, although everyone said I should be.

So which was the conscious choice?

Leaving the actual sex acts out of orientation for a minute, why do you have a problem with someone who's orientation is not the same as yours?

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
What? I am not anti-gay and I am certainly not ignorant. I have nothing against gay people, but a man should not be allowed to marry another man. It's deviant behavior that is just unacceptable in our society.

According to what and who?
If you say god, then why should I follow the path of a deity that I don't believe in?
Fear is what played the biggest part in turning so many away from being cool with GLT marriages. We can blame that on several church leaders for that.

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
What? I am not anti-gay and I am certainly not ignorant. I have nothing against gay people, but a man should not be allowed to marry another man. It's deviant behavior that is just unacceptable in our society.

You're "not anti-gay" but gays are "unacceptable" and "deviant"??!! Stupid liar.

Gryph wrote:

Maybe we need to start voting on straight marriages.

Please feel free and do so. Can you imagine the backlash the gay community would get if they tried pulling a stunt like this? Dont be stupid....Do you ever think before your community speaks? I really dont think so.

George wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm not denying either statement.
If it would make you feel better, take my comments about your observations as replies to the observations and not you.
Peppy, I think the only way to resolve anything is for us to get married. Just for a few days. I promise to be gentle.
You will, of course, be the "woman."

Wow, I am just getting back to topix after a weekend break. However, I am glad I left when I did, otherwise I would have had this hanging over my head all weekend. Perhaps we should start slower, maybe just holding hands.

Eaglefan9727 wrote:

<quoted text>
Please feel free and do so. Can you imagine the backlash the gay community would get if they tried pulling a stunt like this? Dont be stupid....Do you ever think before your community speaks? I really dont think so.

The point is, if we start voting on rights of certain groups then we diminish all of our rights. If your neighbor does not have the same rights as you, then you don't have those rights either. They are then privileges. And privileges can be taken away.

Peppy wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, I am just getting back to topix after a weekend break. However, I am glad I left when I did, otherwise I would have had this hanging over my head all weekend. Perhaps we should start slower, maybe just holding hands.

No go Peppy. I am in it to win it. I will make you my blushing bride and you will bake me a cake. Now go get me a beer.

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

<quoted text>
What? I am not anti-gay and I am certainly not ignorant. I have nothing against gay people, but a man should not be allowed to marry another man. It's deviant behavior that is just unacceptable in our society.

Do you somehow think that the "deviant behavior" will cease simply by suspending gay marriage? That would be a rather foolish thought. The behavior exists, and has for thousands of years. These are Americans who deserve the same protection under the law as any other Americans.

Although I have posted the question numerous times, no one seems to be able to state how allowing gay marriage is detrimental to anyone who would not participate in one. Except Eaglefan9727, whose response cast questions as to his grasp of a Representative Republic and of Freedom of Speech.

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you somehow think that the "deviant behavior" will cease simply by suspending gay marriage? That would be a rather foolish thought. The behavior exists, and has for thousands of years. These are Americans who deserve the same protection under the law as any other Americans.
Although I have posted the question numerous times, no one seems to be able to state how allowing gay marriage is detrimental to anyone who would not participate in one. Except Eaglefan9727, whose response cast questions as to his grasp of a Representative Republic and of Freedom of Speech.

No, I know that it will not cease, but allowing gay marriage will condone, celebrate and legitimize this behavior. I have no problem with gays practicing any type of behavior that they choose, but it should not be legitimized through marriage.

Gay marriage is detrimental because of the reasons I mentioned above. In addition, by allowing a man to marry another man, where does it end? This would be the springboard for others to claim their right to marry as well. If gay marriage is allowed, then why not allow a man to marry two or three men along with two or three women? Why not allow a man to marry his dog? I guarantee, someone will demand the right to do this if gay marriage is legalized - it is inevitable.

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

Gay marriage is detrimental because of the reasons I mentioned above.

...except that you haven't articulated any legitimate reasons except for your own insecurity, prejudice, fear and ignorance.

I sure did. It will be the springboard for others to claim their right to marry and will make a mockery of the institution of marriage.

Base on what do you say that I am insecure, prejudice, fearful and especially ignorant? Because I don't agree with you?

Do you think it OK for a man to marry his dog? Why or why not?

aDoseOfCommonSense wrote:

Base on what do you say that I am insecure, prejudice, fearful and especially ignorant? Because I don't agree with you? Do you think it OK for a man to marry his dog? Why or why not?

Simple, based on your lies and your prejudice -- that you're "not anti-gay", but that we're all "deviant" and "unacceptable". The fact is, you know nothing about my marriage or my life.

And exactly *who* is marrying their dog?