Here's the best hope for the Republicans

[Dos Equis]

actually what you seem to be saying is that you have a problem with homosexuals USING the ballot box to legitimize a lifestyle CHOICE (presumptious as always) but then you have no problem using the ballot box to limit that very same so called choice  

Didn't you just say it WASN'T a religious issue.   

Who are those so called "anti- religious" extremist opposing then?


The point of this thread is that if Huck is on the ticket he will draw in the evangelicals and the Repubs can continue to pay lip service to these "issues" for another few years 

I know I'm probably going to regret this, but here goes . . .

Wrong.  I have no problem with anyone using the Democratic process.  That doesn't mean I support everyone's agenda. 

Yes I said it isn't a religious issue.  It isn’t.  The opposition to homosexual marriage isn't confined to evangelicals or Christian conservatives, etc.   

There are plenty of anti-religious extremists around.  Pick up a newspaper. . . . or look in the mirror.   

I agree that Huck might help McCain.   

[headhuntersix]

I keep saying I don't want to get into it..but anyway.....I agree with Beach to some extent...and if two Bull dykes...and lets be honest..thats what we see when they show actual marriages..want to get married..its not really all that offensive...I would easily agree to civil unions...but its the parades and the bullshit we see from the fringe, that bothers me and really bothers the evangelicals.

[Straw Man]

I know I'm probably going to regret this, but here goes . . .

Wrong.  I have no problem with anyone using the Democratic process.  That doesn't mean I support everyone's agenda. 

Yes I said it isn't a religious issue.  It isn’t.  The opposition to homosexual marriage isn't confined to evangelicals or Christian conservatives, etc.   

There are plenty of anti-religious extremists around.  Pick up a newspaper. . . . or look in the mirror.   

I agree that Huck might help McCain.   

If you dont' have a problem with anyone using the Democratic process then why did you mean by this statement?

True.  It's about people attempting to use the government to legitimize a lifestyle choice. 

Wouldn't you agree that VAST majority of the opposition (not only to gay marriage but to the very existence of gay people) are the religious folks, primarily of the various Christian sects?  If not then what other major group is in opposition?

Finally and hopefully you can comprehend this - I'm not in any way anti-religion.    I'm 100% for the freedom of ALL religious belief equally, including the freedom to have no belief.     

[Straw Man]

I keep saying I don't want to get into it..but anyway.....I agree with Beach to some extent...and if two Bull dykes...and lets be honest..thats what we see when they show actual marriages..want to get married..its not really all that offensive...I would easily agree to civil unions...but its the parades and the bullshit we see from the fringe, that bothers me and really bothers the evangelicals.

OK - so civil unions are in but parades are out

Hey wait, the KKK get parades and I find them to be repugnant.

HH - this is the freedom you've spent your life fighting to defend
 

[Dos Equis]

If you dont' have a problem with anyone using the Democratic process then why did you mean by this statement?

Wouldn't you agree that VAST majority of the opposition (not only to gay marriage but to the very existence of gay people) are the religious folks, primarily of the various Christian sects?  If not then what other major group is in opposition?

Finally and hopefully you can comprehend this - I'm not in any way anti-religion.    I'm 100% for the freedom of ALL religious belief equally, including the freedom to have no belief.     

I'm not sure how else to say this, but I'll say it again:  supporting a person's right to vote doesn't mean you support what the person is voting for.  People are attempting to use the government to legitimize their lifestyle choices; i.e., they are proposing and voting for laws in this regard.  I support their right to use this process, just like I support the right of those on the other side of the issue to vote against those initiatives.

No I don't agree that the vast majority of opposition to homosexual marriage is "religious folks."  You should take a look at the voting on the Defense of Marriage Act (hint:  it was overwhelming) and look at how many states have rejected homosexual marriage.  The voting public has rejected it by large numbers.  I believe it was over 70 percent in Hawaii. 

No I don't agree that the vast majority of "religious folks" are opposed to the "very existence" of homosexuals.  Not sure where you're getting that from. 

[Straw Man]

I'm not sure how else to say this, but I'll say it again:  supporting a person's right to vote doesn't mean you support what the person is voting for.  People are attempting to use the government to legitimize their lifestyle choices; i.e., they are proposing and voting for laws in this regard.  I support their right to use this process, just like I support the right of those on the other side of the issue to vote against those initiatives.

Bum - you're either contradicting yourself or really bad at expressing your ideas.

you wrote:

True.  It's about people attempting to use the government to legitimize a lifestyle choice.   

If you had no issue with this then you should have said

"It's NOT about people attempting to use the governement to legitimize their lifestyle choice"

and of course your use of CHOICE is retarded as every gay person will tell you it's not a choice but you just keep believing whatever you want

Regarding people who oppose gay marriage - would you say that those who are actually Christian oppose it because of their religious beliefs.

[Dos Equis]

Bum - you're either contradicting yourself or really bad at expressing your ideas.

you wrote:

If you had no issue with this then you should have said

"It's NOT about people attempting to use the governement to legitimize their lifestyle choice"

and of course your use of CHOICE is retarded as every gay person will tell you it's not a choice but you just keep believing whatever you want

Regarding people who oppose gay marriage - would you say that those who are actually Christian oppose it because of their religious beliefs.

Dude if you're incapable of understanding my point, then I can't help you.  Try reading it again (I posted it twice). 

Homosexuality is a choice.  There is no science to prove otherwise.  So call my reference to choice "retarded" if you like, but the fact is people have chosen to engage in that lifestyle and people have chosen to stop engaging in that kind of behavior.     

I'm sure there are people who oppose homosexual marriage because of their religious beliefs, just as there are people who oppose it independent of religious beliefs. 

[Colossus_500]

I'm not sure how else to say this, but I'll say it again:  supporting a person's right to vote doesn't mean you support what the person is voting for.  People are attempting to use the government to legitimize their lifestyle choices; i.e., they are proposing and voting for laws in this regard.  I support their right to use this process, just like I support the right of those on the other side of the issue to vote against those initiatives.

No I don't agree that the vast majority of opposition to homosexual marriage is "religious folks."  You should take a look at the voting on the Defense of Marriage Act (hint:  it was overwhelming) and look at how many states have rejected homosexual marriage.  The voting public has rejected it by large numbers.  I believe it was over 70 percent in Hawaii. 

No I don't agree that the vast majority of "religious folks" are opposed to the "very existence" of homosexuals.  Not sure where you're getting that from. 

Well said, Beach.  I don't think it gets any more plain than how you've just stated this. 

[Dos Equis]

Well said, Beach.  I don't think it gets any more plain than how you've just stated this. 

Thanks mang. 

[Straw Man]

Dude if you're incapable of understanding my point, then I can't help you.  Try reading it again (I posted it twice). 

Homosexuality is a choice.  There is no science to prove otherwise.  So call my reference to choice "retarded" if you like, but the fact is people have chosen to engage in that lifestyle and people have chosen to stop engaging in that kind of behavior.     

I'm sure there are people who oppose homosexual marriage because of their religious beliefs, just as there are people who oppose it independent of religious beliefs. 

I read your post more than twice - and I've explained it to you clearly but you still don't understand.

First you claimed your issue was not that they were gay but that they were using the ballot box to try to prevent discrimination (my choice of words there) then you turned around and said that wasn't the issue.

If their oppenents are trying to legislate against them then WTF else do you expect them to do?

Regarding choice - we've had this discussion before and still you CHOOSE to believe something without proof.

Try to get this through your thick bigoted skull - Just because science has not conclusively proven a genetic link to homosexuality does NOT PROVE that its a choice.  

I'm not gay but I wouldn't presume to over ride the statements of gay people who overwhelmingly say it is NOT A CHOICE on their part.

Only an idiot such as yourself would be so presumptious

[Straw Man]

True.  It's about people attempting to use the government to legitimize a lifestyle choice.  It's something that should be decided at the ballot box. 

And it's not a religious issue either. 

Bum - I'm trying really hard to understand your statement

1.  you seem to be saying the issue is not that people are gay (choice or not aside for now) but that THE ISSUE is that they are USING the Government .

Please explain what this means - how are they "using the government" and what exactly is the problem with that?

If there is no problem with that then why even mention it?