NC votes on constitutional ban on gay marriage

Judged:

1

1

1

Kirk wrote:

<quoted text>
If you want to live in the past great go live in the past but don't make the rest of us live in the past.
The world evolves, things change. Do you think we should have slavery again? That was a tradition in America for decades. Should we role back women's right to vote?
No you just want to do harm to LGBT people.
So yes if y'all think that extending rights to ALL citizens is somehow communist then I suggest you go to an actual communist country until you learn the difference.
To directly answer your question I don't think I'm any more important than you but I'm also not LESS important than you.
I think we should be equally important.

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
This ain't a Muslim country, dickhead. There's not much difference between them trying to force a theocracy on people than there is fundie religious freaks in THIS country doing EXACTLY THE SAME THING.
If fundies were REALLY interested in protecting marriage, they would outlaw divorce. But THAT will never happen, because most of them are two-faced hypocrites.

Obskeptic wrote:

<quoted text>
It's not a muslim country yet. The majority of any large population in a society will associate themselves with faith. Be it Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jew or Muslim. So no matter how many centuries go by, humanity will be influenced by the dominant religion of the people in any given region.
The Muslims mission is Jihad and to dominate the world with their religion. The Quran dictates it.

Charlie Feather wrote:

<quoted text>
Sex perverts don’t deserve equal rights.
What you people don’t seem to see is that the homosexual agenda is a very destructive one to a stable and cohesive society.

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
How is that different from christians?

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny that you can't prove a word of that....

Obskeptic wrote:

<quoted text>
Your kidding, right?

Charlie Feather wrote:

<quoted text>
Sex perverts don’t deserve equal rights.
What you people don’t seem to see is that the homosexual agenda is a very destructive one to a stable and cohesive society.

Judged:

1

1

1

Jasper wrote:

<quoted text>
It's still the middle of the afternoon, dumbass, even "two hours" after you posted that. there is no way you know how the election will turn out until later tonight.
I have family out there, and one of my cousins moved away from her father, sister, and children so she could marry her wife in Iowa.

Obskeptic wrote:

<quoted text>
Slavery was a democrat tradition. Murder is a communist tradition. Many in this world believe that man and women by nature were engineered for one another. The mere fact that it takes a man and a women to procreate is natures assurance to us that it was meant to be so. There is nothing wrong with society establishing standards to reinforce that natural order. I am not suggesting that gives society the right to actually "harm" you because your LGBT, however it does not also require that society make any special accommodations to legitimize what many view as abhorrent and unnatural behavior. Look at how the muslim world embraces the LGBT community. That has got to freak you out of your shoes since their plan is to rule the world as a theocracy, and your bunch will be the first ones under the blade.

Doyle wrote:

<quoted text>No, they're getting molested by the HomoQueers.

Kirk wrote:

<quoted text>
Hmmm
Yes clearly extending right to people is SUCH a terrible thing.
If you don't like America - you can leave.
Try going to a REAL communist country like North Korea and then we'll see how close you think we are to that standard.

Kirk wrote:

<quoted text>
But just because 48% of the American public find homosexuality "abhorrent" (to use your word) why does that mean that view gets forced on everyone else?
Some people say some pretty terrible and abhorrent things using that free speech rule we have yet we defend their rights.
What makes your viewpoint any more valid?
How does 2 gay people getting married possibly affect your life unless you happen to be one of those people?
Why do you care? Why would you care? What possible difference does it make to you other than you don't like it?
I agree that male and female were very clearly engineered to propagate the species. So? Marriage isn't always about kids and reproduction. Lots of straight folks get married and never have kids, or can't have kids or are beyond child-bearing age but we don't tell them they are not allowed to get married. So much for that argument.
And you're also right that there is nothing wrong with setting societal norms but when you single out a group of people and say "you're not worthy of all the rights the rest of us have" we call that discrimination and we, as a society, have held that as something we don't accept.
I will also take issue with your "Active harm" argument. The fact that we do not have the right to marry (or civil union) I don't care what it's called to be honest, actively harms me. I can't visit a sick partner in hospital because "I'm not family" unless we spend lots of money to get a lawyer to draw up special paperwork to make that possible. Whereas a married straight person can just SAY "he or she is my spouse" you don't even have to prove it - you just have to say it.
And there is example after example of how denying the marriage right to LGBT folks ACTIVELY HARMS US.
I'm sorry but I don't see why y'all think this is "special accommodation" when we're just asking for what all the straight folks already have. To me a "special accommodation" means an exception to "the rule", we want "the rule" to be applied to us.