Obama-Marriage Debate - Chambersburg, PA

Discuss the national Obama-Marriage debate in Chambersburg, PA.

Chambersburg

Are you with President Obama in supporting gay marriage?

Chambersburg is with Obama on gay marriage.

Yes, all the way		27
Not at all		14
I'm on the fence		0

Vote now in Chambersburg:

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of175

< prev page

next page >

Go to last page| Jump to page:

John Philip Sousa Greencastle, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #1 May 15, 2012 People that think two of the same should sex should get married are only looking at their own self serving interests, including Obama. Marriage is a male and female. What's wrong with civil unions? It's like letting boys in the girl scouts and vice-versa. It's just wrong by its definition.
Borger Greencastle, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #2 May 15, 2012 I'm glad Obama supports it. Say Bye bye to US's first and hopefully last socialist President. Did we learn a lesson?
Really Elizabethtown, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #3 May 15, 2012 Our GLTB friends should have the right to be as miserable as our married heterosexual friends!
Ward Hanover, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #4 May 15, 2012 It's not natural
Really Elizabethtown, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #5 May 15, 2012 Ward wrote: It's not natural then don't marry a same sex partner!
Dan the Man Mount Joy, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #6 May 15, 2012 John Philip Sousa wrote: People that think two of the same should sex should get married are only looking at their own self serving interests, including Obama. Marriage is a male and female. What's wrong with civil unions? It's like letting boys in the girl scouts and vice-versa. It's just wrong by its definition. Not following your logic here. How is it in my self interest to believe that homosexuals should be allowed to get married? Civil unions aren't marriage. It is second-class status. It is the same as "separate but equal." It is wrong to deny an entire class of American citizens equal protection under the law.
Dan the Man Mount Joy, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #7 May 15, 2012 Borger wrote: I'm glad Obama supports it. Say Bye bye to US's first and hopefully last socialist President. Did we learn a lesson? Obama is not socialist by any definition of that word. History bends toward justice. The President is on the right side of history. He will not be punished for being a patriotic American who supports equal rights for ALL Americans.
Doublemint Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #8 May 16, 2012 Really wrote: Our GLTB friends should have the right to be as miserable as our married heterosexual friends! Double your pleasure, double your fun. Be bisexual, love everyone.

Who cares Levittown, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #9 May 16, 2012 Frankly, Ive always felt that if you so vehemently suppose gay marriage, then chances are you are gay yourself. Gays being able to marry wont effect my marriage or family structure in any way, shape or form. It will only effect yours if you would be tempted to break your vows because you could now finally marry a person of the same sex.
Watcher Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #10 May 16, 2012 Dan the Man wrote: <quoted text> Not following your logic here. How is it in my self interest to believe that homosexuals should be allowed to get married? Civil unions aren't marriage. It is second-class status. It is the same as "separate but equal." It is wrong to deny an entire class of American citizens equal protection under the law. I don't quite understand when you say they are being denied equal protection unded the law. Please explain. What equal protection are gay couples being denied?
Watcher Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #11 May 16, 2012 I don't agree with it but it should come up for each state to have a public vote. It should never be a decision for the federal government to decide. The president should bow out of the issue completely. (Unless he’s coming out of the closet and wants to now marry another man).
disagree Washington, DC	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #12 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: I don't agree with it but it should come up for each state to have a public vote. It should never be a decision for the federal government to decide. The president should bow out of the issue completely.(Unless he’s coming out of the closet and wants to now marry another man). You say that as if putting it up to a public vote is doing proponents of gay marriage a service. I believe a public vote would be a terrible idea for something like this, and I hate seeing people using the results in California and North Carolina as justification to keep a group of citizens at second class status. What if there was a public vote on segregation in the 1940's? How do you think that would turn out? Fortunately, opponents of gay marriage are on the wrong side of history. It's only a matter of time until gay marriage is accepted, and everyone will look back and think how stupid we were to think that allowing gays to marry would somehow send everyone else's lives into a drastic death spiral.
Dan the Man Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #13 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: <quoted text> I don't quite understand when you say they are being denied equal protection unded the law. Please explain. What equal protection are gay couples being denied? There are more than 1000 benefits for married couples under federal law that same sex couples are denied, including tax benefits, inheritance benefits, health insurance benefits, veterans benefits, Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, joint adoption, joint insurance policies, ability to sponsor their partner for immigration, right to sue for wrongful death of partner, ability to make medical decisions for an incapacitated partner, and on and on. The 14th Amendment guarantees that the government cannot deny equal protection of the laws. Denying same sex couples the same rights that heterosexual married couples enjoy is unjust and UN-Constitutional.
Dan the Man Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #14 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: I don't agree with it but it should come up for each state to have a public vote. It should never be a decision for the federal government to decide. The president should bow out of the issue completely.(Unless he’s coming out of the closet and wants to now marry another man). The President didn't say the federal government should decide. In fact he specifically said that he thinks the issue will be worked out at a local level because it has not historically been a federal issue. The last part of your quote is just juvenile dumbassery.
Dan the Man Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #15 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: I don't agree with it but it should come up for each state to have a public vote. It should never be a decision for the federal government to decide. The president should bow out of the issue completely.(Unless he’s coming out of the closet and wants to now marry another man). Go hear what he actually said: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transcript-rob...
Watcher Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #16 May 16, 2012 Dan the Man wrote: <quoted text> The President didn't say the federal government should decide. In fact he specifically said that he thinks the issue will be worked out at a local level because it has not historically been a federal issue. The last part of your quote is just juvenile dumbassery. Nice name calling but your taking it out of context. I never said he was trying to force a federal issue of it. What I was saying is that as a PRESIDENT he should bow out. He as far greater things to be concerned about then gay marriage. I.e. The economy studid.
Watcher Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #17 May 16, 2012 disagree wrote: <quoted text> You say that as if putting it up to a public vote is doing proponents of gay marriage a service. I believe a public vote would be a terrible idea for something like this, and I hate seeing people using the results in California and North Carolina as justification to keep a group of citizens at second class status. What if there was a public vote on segregation in the 1940's? How do you think that would turn out? Fortunately, opponents of gay marriage are on the wrong side of history. It's only a matter of time until gay marriage is accepted, and everyone will look back and think how stupid we were to think that allowing gays to marry would somehow send everyone else's lives into a drastic death spiral. What I am saying is that I do not believe that someone who is gay is NOT a second class citizen. Being gay is NOT a condition or disease. You CHOOSE to be gay, there is no gay gene! Someone who is born black, white, red or yellow does not have a choice as to what color they are therefore you cannot in no way possible compare gay right or struggles to those of black Americans, Jew (Jews), Native Americans or Japanese Americans. Gays in this country are not being deprived of any civil right and if they are then I would like to know where. I am not in any way trying to neither insult nor offend anyone who is gay but to give special rights to certain groups seems to be prejudice within itself. That goes for all genders, races, colors, creeds, or religions.
Dan the Man Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #18 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: <quoted text> Nice name calling but your taking it out of context. I never said he was trying to force a federal issue of it. What I was saying is that as a PRESIDENT he should bow out. He as far greater things to be concerned about then gay marriage. I.e. The economy studid. You plainly said this shouldn't be an issue for the federal government to decide and criticized the President for making his comments. That certainly implies that he was trying to make it a federal issue. And what's the context for this remark that ISN'T juvenile? Watcher wrote: (Unless he’s coming out of the closet and wants to now marry another man).
Dan the Man Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #19 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: <quoted text> What I am saying is that I do not believe that someone who is gay is NOT a second class citizen. Being gay is NOT a condition or disease. You CHOOSE to be gay, there is no gay gene! Someone who is born black, white, red or yellow does not have a choice as to what color they are therefore you cannot in no way possible compare gay right or struggles to those of black Americans, Jew (Jews), Native Americans or Japanese Americans. Gays in this country are not being deprived of any civil right and if they are then I would like to know where. I am not in any way trying to neither insult nor offend anyone who is gay but to give special rights to certain groups seems to be prejudice within itself. That goes for all genders, races, colors, creeds, or religions. When did you CHOOSE to be straight? And could you make a different choice than the one you made? Equal rights are not "special rights."
Dan the Man Chambersburg, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #20 May 16, 2012 Watcher wrote: Gays in this country are not being deprived of any civil right and if they are then I would like to know where. Answer here: http://www.topix.net/issue/obama-gay-marriage...
Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required) Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of175

< prev page

next page >

Go to last page| Jump to page:

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.

Other Recent Chambersburg Discussions

Search the Chambersburg Forum:

Topic	Updated	Last By	Comments
Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square	1 hr	Effington	2,912
Anti-choice is deadly to women	1 hr	Effington	119
In Pa., how a potato roll became famous	2 hr	Effington	3
D.C. turns on Obama	3 hr	Effington	39
PA Who do you support for Governor in Pennsylvania... (Oct '10)	6 hr	John Galt	46,132
Blue Gray Alliance 150th Gettysburg Reenactment	9 hr	Mark Way	1
Tax exempt Tea Party?	17 hr	Effington	35