Obama-Marriage Debate - Utica, NY

Discuss the national Obama-Marriage debate in Utica, NY.

Are you with President Obama in supporting gay marriage?

Utica is with Obama on gay marriage.
Yes, all the way
 
36
Not at all
 
35
I'm on the fence
 
0

Vote now in Utica:

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of262
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Jim Fletcher

Oneida, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 11, 2012
 
Marriage; the sacred union between a man and a women . referance .. King James Bible!
Bigcoz

Utica, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 11, 2012
 
No he dosen't do anything right
Dog Lover

Homer, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
May 11, 2012
 
I am a middle aged white Christian male. I am old school and do not believe in this nonsense. A marriage was, is and always should be between a man and a woman. It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!
bob

Whitehouse Station, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
May 11, 2012
 
no I hate anything that OBUMA does
NY voter

Baldwinsville, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
May 12, 2012
 
The constitution states-ALL are created equal!
forda record

Chittenango, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
May 12, 2012
 
NY voter wrote:
The constitution states-ALL are created equal!
You wouldn't know it by the way the neo-con haters cry about "losing their freedoms". What freedoms? The freedom to take away or block others freedoms?
forda record

Chittenango, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
May 12, 2012
 
For those who may think we have never re-defined marriage, here's what it meant here in the 1800's . Good thing we "evolved" ay?

If a woman opted to marry, she was forced to give up all property to her husband, as well as swear away all rights of her body to her husband. If the situation arose where the woman was being beaten, or abused in another way, she could do nothing about it because of a law that allowed men to control their wives by using "necessary force". Married men during this time also did not have to be faithful to their wives, they had every right to visit the Brothel, or even keep a mistress in the same house.
Divorce during the 19th century was nearly impossible for a woman to obtain, and was reasonably easy for a man to obtain. In order for a man to divorce his wife, all her needed to do was to hire an attorney and argue that his wife was having an affair, and generally the divorce was granted. If a woman wanted to obtain a divorce from her husband she had to find the means of hiring a lawyer, most likely from a brother or wealthy relative who could pay for her legal fees. After this she then had to prove, not only that her husband was having an affair, but that he was committing, "incest, cruelty, bigamy, or desertion." As you can see divorce was extremely difficult to achieve.
If a woman could not handle her marriage situation, she might try to flee from her household. If this happened, a husband had the legal right to summon the police to find her, and he then could decide if he wanted her jailed for escaping, much like slaves in New England.
The first step towards female equality was the marriage property act of 1882. This act allowed women to keep any inheritance they gained after the death of a father, and also allowed them to keep any wages earned in factories, etc. After this act many women could see the alternatives of living independently, unmarried because they then had means to support themselves, and lead a prosperous life.

So we should never re-define? We should not evolve?
DaTruth

Utica, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 12, 2012
 
Definition of marriage has evolved and it is defined. 1 man to 1 woman. Case closed, shut and over. No where does it say you can marry your dog.
forda record wrote:
For those who may think we have never re-defined marriage, here's what it meant here in the 1800's . Good thing we "evolved" ay?
If a woman opted to marry, she was forced to give up all property to her husband, as well as swear away all rights of her body to her husband. If the situation arose where the woman was being beaten, or abused in another way, she could do nothing about it because of a law that allowed men to control their wives by using "necessary force". Married men during this time also did not have to be faithful to their wives, they had every right to visit the Brothel, or even keep a mistress in the same house.
Divorce during the 19th century was nearly impossible for a woman to obtain, and was reasonably easy for a man to obtain. In order for a man to divorce his wife, all her needed to do was to hire an attorney and argue that his wife was having an affair, and generally the divorce was granted. If a woman wanted to obtain a divorce from her husband she had to find the means of hiring a lawyer, most likely from a brother or wealthy relative who could pay for her legal fees. After this she then had to prove, not only that her husband was having an affair, but that he was committing, "incest, cruelty, bigamy, or desertion." As you can see divorce was extremely difficult to achieve.
If a woman could not handle her marriage situation, she might try to flee from her household. If this happened, a husband had the legal right to summon the police to find her, and he then could decide if he wanted her jailed for escaping, much like slaves in New England.
The first step towards female equality was the marriage property act of 1882. This act allowed women to keep any inheritance they gained after the death of a father, and also allowed them to keep any wages earned in factories, etc. After this act many women could see the alternatives of living independently, unmarried because they then had means to support themselves, and lead a prosperous life.
So we should never re-define? We should not evolve?
forda record

Chittenango, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 12, 2012
 
DaTruth wrote:
Definition of marriage has evolved and it is defined. 1 man to 1 woman. Case closed, shut and over. No where does it say you can marry your dog.
<quoted text>
Brilliant argument there. "Because I said so" and the canine reference... go beat your wife.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
May 13, 2012
 
This kind of militarism and patriotism makes a bizarre case for same sex marriage:

“I think about those soldiers or airmen or Marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage.”
B. Obama
fools

Georgetown, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 13, 2012
 
Adam and eve were never married and marriage predates cristianity

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 13, 2012
 
What is the legal justification for denying marriage equality?

Level 7

Since: May 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
May 13, 2012
 
Brian wrote:
If a man who is of sound mind and body of legal age can marry either a man or woman of sound mind and body of legal age, and a woman of sound mind and body of legal age can marry either a man or woman of sound mind and body of legal age, can I , a 45 year old man of sound mind and body of legal age marry my 21 year old daughter who is also of sound mind and body and of legal age ? We love each other dearly, and have been having sex regularly for the last two years. Anyone know the answer, any help appreciated.
No, you cannot marry your daughter. There are laws against this.

“CAPS LOCK CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
May 13, 2012
 
I don't believe criminalizing same sex marriage is our best course, because of the harm it could cause gays. Instead, I prefer a federal marriage amendment.

Back when Utah practiced polygamy, the Federal government enacted laws making bigamy illegal. That worked, and Utah changed its marriage laws, before it could become a state.

What worked in the past against polygamy, criminal penalty, isn't necessarily the best way to work the problem today. No Republican is advocating criminalizing same sex marriage, because that would make them as extreme as those trying to redefine marriage for everyone.
Your Italian Grandmother

Utica, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
May 14, 2012
 
Not the way I raised my kids to use their sausage!
obama ia gay

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
May 14, 2012
 
If Obama is gay and wants a life partner that is fine with me. He just can,t call it marriage.
thisguy

Sheboygan, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
May 14, 2012
 
this guy from utica,NY makes no sense idk how he is still able to come on this site what a dick he dont even have kids he's just trying to piss people off
what the

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
May 14, 2012
 
230,000 people lost their unemployment last week and failure obama is talking about gay marriage? What an idiot!
really

Sheboygan, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
May 14, 2012
 
The man had an opinion one statement when did that become a federal offense isn't the first amendment the freedom of speech? don't get hung up on one little thing he said. as long as they are not bothering you why should it even matter. i bet no one will care about it in 100 years and most of us wont even be alive then so why should it matter. you can take your kid out of the gay school but you can take the gay outa your kids. And if you can't handle it go stab your eyes out it won't bother you so much then.
test

Utica, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
May 14, 2012
 
Test

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of262
< prev 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.

205 Users are viewing the Utica Forum right now

Search the Utica Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
utica teachers with implants 7 min hydro 1
Stewarts on Culver not economic developement. 19 min Traffic Circle Riggies 11
RCIL's Newest Addition Executive Director AKA T... 24 min Keep the Vision 31
Observer Dispatch - CNY News For Stupid People 24 min Traffic Circle Riggies 20
comets vancouver 27 min Traffic Circle Riggies 132
Utica Comets Future 28 min Traffic Circle Riggies 15
Laughing At Utica 33 min Traffic Circle Riggies 15
Official: Goodbye Comets 34 min Traffic Circle Riggies 44
What do people think about lawrence mazza (Mar '09) 34 min people hunter 26
Dan LaBella...where is he now? 6 hr Phony partasite cop 109

Utica Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]