Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

Mar 1, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Skanner

With Maryland poised to legalize gay marriage, some conservative opponents and religious leaders are counting on members of their congregations, especially in black churches, to upend the legislation at the polls this fall.

Comments
6,101 - 6,120 of 9,656 Comments Last updated Nov 19, 2013

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6559
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
You would call it a special right if it applied to incestuous couples, polygamists and pedophiles; the same principle applies to same sex marriage. Every society has defined marriage as male/female. There is no copy of a same sex marriage law before the 21st Century.
Well, welcome to it!

I don't know WHAT I'd call it if there really WERE any incestuous, polygamist, or pedophilic people pursuing it. We may never know, if THEY don't step up and actually pursue it!

But the states which CURRENTLY ALLOW incestuous marriages don't call it a "special right". Did you fight hard to stop THEM? Are you fighting NOW to reverse their laws?

Both polygamy and pedophilia have ALREADY been socially examined, and outlawed. Before marriage could apply to THOSE situations, we'd need to review THOSE laws FIRST. No one is doing that. No one is calling for that. STOP PRETENDING THAT ANYONE IS.

ALL these red herrings which you have super-glued to your argument almost ALWAYS represent abusive, domineering relationships, that have NOTHING to do with love, mutual committment or equal partnership.

You CLAIM to respect and tolerate gay people, yet you can't stop comparing and aligning us with these criminal and harmful situations that are completely unrelated to what drives human beings to choose a partner for life. The only reasonable conclusion is that you see us as equally criminal and harmful, but that you restrict yourself from coming out and saying so directly.

No one has any desire to see patriarchal men assemble harems of meek women for themselves. No one is interested in helping greasy uncle Chester to corner his neice in the basement every time he babysits. The concept of allowing consenting same-sex adults to choose their life partner as a spouse is NOT AT ALL applicable to the largely illegal, and wholly unequal, distortions of human interaction that you can't help yourself from from trying to tie to homosexual relationships.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6560
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's a lie, I've called Rose on this many times. I've always written there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality. I oppose redefining marriage as one person; I am against solo marriage. Does that show hatred of everyone who masturbates? I oppose redefining marriage to allow polygamy; Does that show hatred of Muslims?
NO! I oppose hate speech, I will argue against people who label all political opponents, sexists, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist and bigots! The left is very good at defaming opponents; we can't let them get away with it.
Instead of arguing the issues, Rose prefers to call any defender of marriage as one man and one woman, a hater. That way, she may dismiss the arguments of haters, without having to think about the issue.
it occurs to me that opposers don't have to change "hearts and minds" the gays do..
and their tact of calling everyone a bigot is not likely to work..
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6561
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
it occurs to me that opposers don't have to change "hearts and minds" the gays do..
and their tact of calling everyone a bigot is not likely to work..
Well, it certainly doesn't work on liars like you, that's for sure. Why would you even for one second contemplate WHY someone would call you a bigot? All it does it trigger your narcissistic rage.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6562
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it certainly doesn't work on liars like you, that's for sure. Why would you even for one second contemplate WHY someone would call you a bigot? All it does it trigger your narcissistic rage.
rage?
where?

who lies?
you do.

The bible thumpers show no compassion and the gays show no tolerance...
I don't put much stock in either side...
and especially not to the cute names they call each other...

call me bigot...
I know better...

what would you know anyway, people from jersey are one step below human...
I have been all around this country and the only thing consistent is that everyone knows jersey sucks...
you know it too.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6563
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Though Rupert Everett blazed a trail for homosexual actors when he came out decades ago, he's now saying that gay men don't make good parents.
The actor best known for "Shakespeare in Love" and "My Best Friend's Wedding" told Britain's Sunday Times Magazine that his mother has met his boyfriend but "still wishes I had a wife and kids."
"She thinks children need a father and a mother and I agree with her," he said. "I can't think of anything worse than being brought up by two gay dads."

I guess gays are bigots too...
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6564
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
rage?
where?
who lies?
you do.
The bible thumpers show no compassion and the gays show no tolerance...
I don't put much stock in either side...
and especially not to the cute names they call each other...
call me bigot...
I know better...
what would you know anyway, people from jersey are one step below human...
I have been all around this country and the only thing consistent is that everyone knows jersey sucks...
you know it too.
Where's your narcissistic rage?
Right here, silly girl: "what would you know anyway, people from jersey are one step below human...
I have been all around this country and the only thing consistent is that everyone knows jersey sucks...
you know it too."

I would have thought you learned about "hasty generalizations" in law school..... oh that's right.... you didn't go to law school. It's just your narcissistic rage.....

-Shamelessness: Shame is the feeling that lurks beneath all unhealthy narcissism, and the inability to process shame in healthy ways.
-Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.
-Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
-Envy: A narcissist may secure a sense of superiority in the face of another person's ability by using contempt to minimize the other person.
-Entitlement: Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6565
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
blah blah, I know jersey is the worst...
go play with judge it icons or the poo water...
either way....

no need for me to continue with you...
Jersey is all i needed to hear...

good luck!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6566
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

2

EdmondWA wrote:
...You CLAIM to respect and tolerate gay people, yet you can't stop comparing and aligning us with these criminal and harmful situations that are completely unrelated to what drives human beings to choose a partner for life. The only reasonable conclusion is that you see us as equally criminal and harmful, but that you restrict yourself from coming out and saying so directly.
In addition to often repeating, there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality, I never write slander against homosexuals and condemn those that do.

I'm not comparing homosexuals with bestialists, incest couples, polygamists and necrophiliacs, I comparing the legal justification for changing the definition of marriage. You can't base your arguments on love or marriage equality without including those other groups.

.
EdmondWA wrote:
No one has any desire to see patriarchal men assemble harems of meek women for themselves. No one is interested in helping greasy uncle Chester to corner his neice in the basement every time he babysits. The concept of allowing consenting same-sex adults to choose their life partner as a spouse is NOT AT ALL applicable to the largely illegal, and wholly unequal, distortions of human interaction that you can't help yourself from from trying to tie to homosexual relationships.
If your legal arguments can justify polygamy, incest marriage or pedophile marriage, then you have bad arguments; don't blame me, blame your arguments.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6567
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
go play with judge it icons or the poo water...
either way....
no need for me to continue with you...
Jersey is all i needed to hear...
good luck!
-Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
Jane Dough

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6568
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
-Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
yes, i agree that is exactly what you are doing...

pathetic.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6569
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
yes, i agree that is exactly what you are doing...
pathetic.
Entitlement: Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an "awkward" or "difficult" person. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6570
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

JBH wrote:
You many different people out there still do not understand your imminent sake is at hand, that you need to give a full evaluation of the next course with no more Obama.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH OBAMA --NO MATTER WHAT HE SAYS,AS ALL HAVE BEEN PROVEN that Obama is a big failure and the biggest trouble maker for all of you in modern times.
You've got a black president, get over it.
Now, make an on topic post.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6571
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The Courts imposed new marriage law on the entire state. This is why we shouldn't follow Rose's social policy, they have no conception of consequences.
What are the consequences, b!tch? Come on tell us. Adam and Steve get married. What difference does it make to Adam and Betty? Let's hear it. Give us some real, specific answers, or sip on a big, steaming cup of STFU.
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text> Homosexuals have the equal right to marry under current law, there is no orientation test for a marriage license. Homosexuals have always married under equal law with everyone else, I cite Meredith Baxter and Oscar Wilde as two examples.
Creating new law for same sex marriage a is special right. There is no gender equality right in the Constitution.
You can't have it both ways, idiot. Straight people would also be able to marry someone of the same sex, so it wouldn't be a special right.
And there is gender equality right in the Constitution, 14th Amendment.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6572
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>That's a lie, I've called Rose on this many times. I've always written there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality.
Grow a pair and admit it... You feel gay marriage would "harm civilization" because you hate gay people.
Brian_G wrote:
I oppose redefining marriage as one person; I am against solo marriage. Does that show hatred of everyone who masturbates? I oppose redefining marriage to allow polygamy; Does that show hatred of Muslims?
Red herrings. Those aren't equal rights issues.
Brian_G wrote:
NO! I oppose hate speech, I will argue against people who label all political opponents, sexists, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist and bigots! The left is very good at defaming opponents; we can't let them get away with it.
Instead of arguing the issues, Rose prefers to call any defender of marriage as one man and one woman, a hater. That way, she may dismiss the arguments of haters, without having to think about the issue.
I deal with the issues. Equal rights.
You are a hater.
And nobody is against marriage between one man and one woman. At least nobody I've heard. You are being dishonest when you frame the argument that way.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6573
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Brian_G wrote:
In addition to often repeating, there is nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality, I never write slander against homosexuals and condemn those that do.
I'm not comparing homosexuals with bestialists, incest couples, polygamists and necrophiliacs, I comparing the legal justification for changing the definition of marriage. You can't base your arguments on love or marriage equality without including those other groups.
I absolutely can. They are unrelated.

You can't keep saying that these CRIMES are in parallel with the bond held by a gay couple, without simultaneously maligning us AS criminals. Now you've gone past the usual "trinity" of polygamy/incest/pedophilia, and apparently felt it was necessary to throw in bestiality and necrophilia, as well. I should resolve to never be shocked by how BASE these arguments become. What about inanimate objects? You forgot those.
Brian_G wrote:
If your legal arguments can justify polygamy, incest marriage or pedophile marriage, then you have bad arguments; don't blame me, blame your arguments.
My arguments for allowing loving gay couples to marry do NOT justify the CRIMES of polygamy, incest (where it's illegal!), or pedophilia.

If you want to discuss the dangers of opening the door to polygamy, then BEGIN by changing the laws which say the government will offer rights and protections for no more than ONE spouse each.

If you think that same-sex marriage will justify incest, then begin by repealing the EXISTING incest laws in this country, many of which ALLOW incest in various cases. I don't understand why you keep citing this one, since STRAIGHT people ALREADY allow it all over the place. Go fix what already EXISTS, before you accuse us of causing it to exist after the fact.

If you're worred that government recognition of two equal, consenting adult partners will somehow permit pedophilia, then explain how ANY past, present or suggested future marriage equality laws will have ANY bearing on age-of-consent laws.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6575
Sep 17, 2012
 
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
I absolutely can. They are unrelated.
You can't keep saying that these CRIMES are in parallel with the bond held by a gay couple, without simultaneously maligning us AS criminals. Now you've gone past the usual "trinity" of polygamy/incest/pedophilia, and apparently felt it was necessary to throw in bestiality and necrophilia, as well. I should resolve to never be shocked by how BASE these arguments become. What about inanimate objects? You forgot those.
<quoted text>
My arguments for allowing loving gay couples to marry do NOT justify the CRIMES of polygamy, incest (where it's illegal!), or pedophilia.
If you want to discuss the dangers of opening the door to polygamy, then BEGIN by changing the laws which say the government will offer rights and protections for no more than ONE spouse each.
If you think that same-sex marriage will justify incest, then begin by repealing the EXISTING incest laws in this country, many of which ALLOW incest in various cases. I don't understand why you keep citing this one, since STRAIGHT people ALREADY allow it all over the place. Go fix what already EXISTS, before you accuse us of causing it to exist after the fact.
If you're worred that government recognition of two equal, consenting adult partners will somehow permit pedophilia, then explain how ANY past, present or suggested future marriage equality laws will have ANY bearing on age-of-consent laws.
Actually beasiality is only a crime in certain states...so technically....

Even 1st cousins are ok in one of those liberal thinking states.....so technically again........

Actually, these things are moving in the same direction as ssm...do you think 'these' types of marriages are harmful to the institution of marriage????

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6576
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually beasiality is only a crime in certain states...so technically....
Even 1st cousins are ok in one of those liberal thinking states.....so technically again........
Actually, these things are moving in the same direction as ssm...do you think 'these' types of marriages are harmful to the institution of marriage????
Just admit you don't have a good argument against gay marriage, so you are trying to change the subject.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6577
Sep 17, 2012
 
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Just admit you don't have a good argument against gay marriage, so you are trying to change the subject.
Just admit you don't see 'equality' in other types of marriages...

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6579
Sep 17, 2012
 
Brian_G wrote:
BTW, the Maryland court has found laws limiting marriage to one man and one woman constitutional, there's no gender equality right in Maryland's Constitution either.
All citizens have a right to equal protection of the law.

You are being silly.

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6580
Sep 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Just admit you don't see 'equality' in other types of marriages...
IOW, you can't deal with the subject, gay marriage, so you try to change the subject.
Can you say, "Red herrings"?
Prove me wrong, come up with a good argument against gay marriage.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••