| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
28 Mar 2005 11:47:58 AM |
| Object: |
ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
Why would any man need another man to provide him with health care
benefits? The advantage of gay partnerships is that there are no
children at home that need attending. Let each man provide his own
health care, just like single straight people do. This notion that one
guy stays home and plays "Donna Reed" while the other one goes to work
should not become a burden on the American health care system. The
people of Michigan (and many other states) have spoken; No gay
marriage. Stop seeking "special" dispensations just because your
different.
http://www.freep.com/news/mich/gay22e_20050322.htm
Despite marriage ban, couples want health care
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit Monday asking the
courts to protect same-sex couples' health benefits in light of a state
constitutional ban on gay marriage.
In the suit, filed in Ingham County Circuit Court, the ACLU asked the
court to stipulate that the ban on gay marriage does not extend to
health care benefits for same-sex partners. The amendment, they said,
is ambiguous.
The ACLU filed the suit less than a week after state Attorney General
Mike Cox issued his legal interpretation about what effect the
amendment should have on health benefits. He concluded that the
amendment bans government agencies from extending benefits to same-sex
couples in any future contract negotiations.
.
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
25 Apr 2005 08:12:08 PM |
|
|
Sir Marksman wrote:
"Dionisio" <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote:
Sir Marksman wrote:
You are an abomination.
<Leans closer, looking deeply into your eyes>
And gets slapped upside her head.
<Cue Morticia Addams> "Ohhh! You've done this before, haven't you?"
--
The psychotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 5 and is perfectly happy about it; the neurotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 4, but is terribly worried about it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
25 Apr 2005 10:57:57 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:17:18 GMT, Dionisio
<moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
Can you say it in French? And call me "Gomez." Gomez Addams. Wait right
here and I'll get the leather straps...
Don't torture yourself Gomez.. that's my job.
Damn, I love that movie.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
23 Apr 2005 07:30:49 AM |
|
|
Jenn, you are a *very* bad forger. You let your email address slip in
there instead of changing it to Marksman's. Bad girl. Bad, bad girl. Now
you must be spanked. Um, by the by, has anyone seen my Nerf Paddle? No?
Rats. Okay, guess you get pizza instead. I hope that teaches you a lesson!
Sir Marksman wrote:
Here it is again for you to peruse:
Begin:
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114096876.579936.281960@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Jenn: <<> So, in order to not "attack a position not held by my
opponet", I need
to know your position: If you were only allowed to marry those you
could not love, would you consider that just?
Marksman: <<Strawman.
Markman"s Mom: "Put yourself in my place. If you play in the street,
I can't watch you and keep you safe."
Marksman: "Strawman!"
Marksman: "Mom, why did you divorce Dad?"
Marksman's Mom: "Because he was cheating on me."
Marksman: "So?"
M's Mom: "Put yourself in my place...."
Marksman: "Strawman!"
End.
Don't you just HATE when your own tactics are used against you????
ROFL!!!! Now go whine in the corner until you admit you FORGED the above...
Cheers!
--
The psychotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 5 and is perfectly happy about it; the neurotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 4, but is terribly worried about it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Marksman" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 10:50:21 AM |
|
|
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114097293.958361.153860@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
<<<<"Jenn" <jenncondu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Look I cannot even attempt to support my bogus position if you won't
allow
me to use strawman arguments.
Oh look! Marksman has now resorted to the most childish usenet LIE of
all: MAKING UP A QUOTE!!
It was a reply to your FORGERY in the previous post, see below:
Begin:
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114096876.579936.281960@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Jenn: <<> So, in order to not "attack a position not held by my
opponet", I need
to know your position: If you were only allowed to marry those you
could not love, would you consider that just?
Marksman: <<Strawman.
Markman"s Mom: "Put yourself in my place. If you play in the street,
I can't watch you and keep you safe."
Marksman: "Strawman!"
Marksman: "Mom, why did you divorce Dad?"
Marksman's Mom: "Because he was cheating on me."
Marksman: "So?"
M's Mom: "Put yourself in my place...."
Marksman: "Strawman!"
End.
Don't you just HATE when your own tactics are used against you????
ROFL!!!! Now go whine in the corner until you admit you FORGED the above...
Cheers!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kurt Lochner Weasel Remember!" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
20 Apr 2005 09:32:07 PM |
|
|
Shrill Narksman <gerrymcg@maine.rr.com> was again frightened by:
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Marksman: >>Because it is a strawman
You have no answer.
To your strawman? LOL!
Here let me educate you:
That'd be something of a 'first'..
The Straw Man is a type of Red Herring because[..]
Meanwhile, a squadron of Clues flew a 'missing man'
formation right over Gerry's head..
--Just my two cents worth..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 06:18:52 AM |
|
|
On 20 Apr 2005 14:48:10 -0700, "Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote:
Jenn: <<> If the law allowed the beating of guys named Marksman, of
which there
is only ONE in the country, should the law not be changed?
Marksman: <<Strawman.
No, a rhetorical question. Why don't you answer it?
Errr. Because it's rhetoric? (:-)
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 06:16:40 AM |
|
|
Marksman: <<<So you show .00001 percent and use that as a reason?
The problem is that your " .00001 percent", are the figures in the fore front of
the sanctity of marriage, and family first, republicans are god fearing xtians,
masquerade, and are being shown to be hypocrites.
The world judges you by what the people it sees. The vast majority of American
people probably *are* descent people, wanting only to get on with their lives.
Unfortunately, the people the world sees, are your " .00001 percent", your
government included, and that is why anti-American reaction is growing around
the world.
Those " .00001 percent", are holding America, up to the world, as liars and
hypocrites.
....And you are rooting for them.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Marksman" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 06:39:37 AM |
|
|
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:k42f61ddogofl0io1tm84ilccuhfv58oe4@4ax.com...
Marksman: <<<So you show .00001 percent and use that as a reason?
The problem is that your " .00001 percent", are the figures in the fore
front of
the sanctity of marriage, and family first, republicans are god fearing
xtians,
masquerade, and are being shown to be hypocrites.
The world judges you by what the people it sees. The vast majority of
American
people probably *are* descent people, wanting only to get on with their
lives.
Unfortunately, the people the world sees, are your " .00001 percent", your
government included, and that is why anti-American reaction is growing
around
the world.
Those " .00001 percent", are holding America, up to the world, as liars
and
hypocrites.
If the world only looks at the .00001 percent, they are fools.
...And you are rooting for them.
Since I am not rooting for the .00001 percent, you are a proven LIAR.
Cheers!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 11:59:59 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:16:40 GMT, Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey>
wrote:
Those " .00001 percent", are holding America, up to the world, as liars and
hypocrites.
...And you are rooting for them.
You have Americans confused with someone who gives a ***** what you
think, boy. We really have no need for your admiration. Never have,
never will.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 06:00:32 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:07:57 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114030892.455207.200380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
<<<It's amusing how many of these protectors of marriage are serial
divorcers and adulterers. >>>
Indeed:
Jim Bakker - adultery
Jimmy Swaggart - adultery
Bob Dole - adultery
Coulter - "Let's say I go out every night, I meet a guy have sex
with him. Good for me. I'm not married." Rivera Live
Helen Chenoweth (R - Idaho) - serial adultery
Sue Myrick (R- N.C.) - adultery
Henry Hyde - adultery
Bob Barr - adultery
Dan Burton - adultery
Bob Livingstone - adultery
Bob Packwood - sexual harassment
Steve Symms - (R- Idaho) - serial adultery
Newt Gingrich - adultery
Beverly Russell - (S. Carolina) - child molestation
Jim Bunn - (R - Oregon) - adultery
Jim Nussle - (R - Iowa) - adultery
Jim Longley - (R - Maine) - adultery
Enid Green - (R- Utah) - adultery
Joe Scarborough - (R- Florida) - adultery
Meredith Christensen ( Nebraska) - adultery
John McLaughlin - sexual harassment
George Will - adultery
Tim Hutchinson (R - Arkansas) - adultery
Sun Myung Moon - violence, adultery
Rudy Giuliani -adultery
George Roche III - adultery with his son's wife
Earl Kimmerling - child molestation
Mike Trout - adultery
Mike Bowers - adultery
Richard Delgaudio - ( he brought us Paula Jones) - child pornography
Ken Calvert - arrested for engaging with a prostitute
Matt Glavin - homosexual indecent exposure
Deal Hudson - sexual harassment of a female student
Edward L. Schrock (R-Va.) - married but solicited sex from male
homosexual
Al Regnery - left DOJ after porn discovered on his PC
Philip Giordano - sexual child abuse
Randal David Ankeney - attempted sexual assault on a child
Robert Bauman - homosexual sex with a minor
John Hathaway - sex with a minor
Stephen White - soliciting a 14 year old boy
Jon Matthews - indecency with a child
Earl "Butch" Kimmerling - child molestation
Paul Ingram - incest
Andrew Buhr - sodomy with a 12 year old
Keith Westmoreland - indecency with minors
John Allen Burt - molesting a minor
Parker J. Bena - child pornography
Larry Jack Schwarz - child pornography
Robin Vanderwall - soliciting sex with minors of both sexes
Marty Glickman - unlawful sexual activity with a minor
Dan Crane - sex with a minor (a Congressional page)
Donald "Buz" Lukens - sex with a minor
What purpose does it serve, to show this? Surely you understand there are at
least 300 million other people out there. Are we to take your publication
here to mean that we are all one form or other of a bad family prospect?
You're smarter than to try to make a point this way.
Only if you are a republican.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 07:20:05 AM |
|
|
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:rt1f61lcunl61qvu67l3lj3k9nmtp1uvo4@4ax.com...
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:07:57 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114030892.455207.200380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
<<<It's amusing how many of these protectors of marriage are serial
divorcers and adulterers. >>>
Indeed:
Jim Bakker - adultery
Jimmy Swaggart - adultery
Bob Dole - adultery
Coulter - "Let's say I go out every night, I meet a guy have sex
with him. Good for me. I'm not married." Rivera Live
Helen Chenoweth (R - Idaho) - serial adultery
Sue Myrick (R- N.C.) - adultery
Henry Hyde - adultery
Bob Barr - adultery
Dan Burton - adultery
Bob Livingstone - adultery
Bob Packwood - sexual harassment
Steve Symms - (R- Idaho) - serial adultery
Newt Gingrich - adultery
Beverly Russell - (S. Carolina) - child molestation
Jim Bunn - (R - Oregon) - adultery
Jim Nussle - (R - Iowa) - adultery
Jim Longley - (R - Maine) - adultery
Enid Green - (R- Utah) - adultery
Joe Scarborough - (R- Florida) - adultery
Meredith Christensen ( Nebraska) - adultery
John McLaughlin - sexual harassment
George Will - adultery
Tim Hutchinson (R - Arkansas) - adultery
Sun Myung Moon - violence, adultery
Rudy Giuliani -adultery
George Roche III - adultery with his son's wife
Earl Kimmerling - child molestation
Mike Trout - adultery
Mike Bowers - adultery
Richard Delgaudio - ( he brought us Paula Jones) - child pornography
Ken Calvert - arrested for engaging with a prostitute
Matt Glavin - homosexual indecent exposure
Deal Hudson - sexual harassment of a female student
Edward L. Schrock (R-Va.) - married but solicited sex from male
homosexual
Al Regnery - left DOJ after porn discovered on his PC
Philip Giordano - sexual child abuse
Randal David Ankeney - attempted sexual assault on a child
Robert Bauman - homosexual sex with a minor
John Hathaway - sex with a minor
Stephen White - soliciting a 14 year old boy
Jon Matthews - indecency with a child
Earl "Butch" Kimmerling - child molestation
Paul Ingram - incest
Andrew Buhr - sodomy with a 12 year old
Keith Westmoreland - indecency with minors
John Allen Burt - molesting a minor
Parker J. Bena - child pornography
Larry Jack Schwarz - child pornography
Robin Vanderwall - soliciting sex with minors of both sexes
Marty Glickman - unlawful sexual activity with a minor
Dan Crane - sex with a minor (a Congressional page)
Donald "Buz" Lukens - sex with a minor
What purpose does it serve, to show this? Surely you understand there are
at
least 300 million other people out there. Are we to take your publication
here to mean that we are all one form or other of a bad family prospect?
You're smarter than to try to make a point this way.
Only if you are a republican.
PLONK. Too childish.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
21 Apr 2005 06:14:11 AM |
|
|
Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote:
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:07:57 GMT, "Maverick"
<justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1114030892.455207.200380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
<<<It's amusing how many of these protectors of marriage are serial
divorcers and adulterers. >>>
Indeed:
Jim Bakker - adultery
Jimmy Swaggart - adultery
Bob Dole - adultery
Coulter - "Let's say I go out every night, I meet a guy have sex
with him. Good for me. I'm not married." Rivera Live
Helen Chenoweth (R - Idaho) - serial adultery
Sue Myrick (R- N.C.) - adultery
Henry Hyde - adultery
Bob Barr - adultery
Dan Burton - adultery
Bob Livingstone - adultery
Bob Packwood - sexual harassment
Steve Symms - (R- Idaho) - serial adultery
Newt Gingrich - adultery
Beverly Russell - (S. Carolina) - child molestation
Jim Bunn - (R - Oregon) - adultery
Jim Nussle - (R - Iowa) - adultery
Jim Longley - (R - Maine) - adultery
Enid Green - (R- Utah) - adultery
Joe Scarborough - (R- Florida) - adultery
Meredith Christensen ( Nebraska) - adultery
John McLaughlin - sexual harassment
George Will - adultery
Tim Hutchinson (R - Arkansas) - adultery
Sun Myung Moon - violence, adultery
Rudy Giuliani -adultery
George Roche III - adultery with his son's wife
Earl Kimmerling - child molestation
Mike Trout - adultery
Mike Bowers - adultery
Richard Delgaudio - ( he brought us Paula Jones) - child pornography
Ken Calvert - arrested for engaging with a prostitute
Matt Glavin - homosexual indecent exposure
Deal Hudson - sexual harassment of a female student
Edward L. Schrock (R-Va.) - married but solicited sex from male
homosexual
Al Regnery - left DOJ after porn discovered on his PC
Philip Giordano - sexual child abuse
Randal David Ankeney - attempted sexual assault on a child
Robert Bauman - homosexual sex with a minor
John Hathaway - sex with a minor
Stephen White - soliciting a 14 year old boy
Jon Matthews - indecency with a child
Earl "Butch" Kimmerling - child molestation
Paul Ingram - incest
Andrew Buhr - sodomy with a 12 year old
Keith Westmoreland - indecency with minors
John Allen Burt - molesting a minor
Parker J. Bena - child pornography
Larry Jack Schwarz - child pornography
Robin Vanderwall - soliciting sex with minors of both sexes
Marty Glickman - unlawful sexual activity with a minor
Dan Crane - sex with a minor (a Congressional page)
Donald "Buz" Lukens - sex with a minor
What purpose does it serve, to show this? Surely you understand
there are at least 300 million other people out there. Are we to
take your publication here to mean that we are all one form or other
of a bad family prospect? You're smarter than to try to make a point
this way.
Only if you are a republican.
Also, she missed Ronald Reagan - Adulterer.
--
"Only Buddhism is compatible with science. It covers the smallest
particles to the largest creations of the cosmos. It is the only
religion capable of scientific truth."
Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
20 Apr 2005 04:54:54 PM |
|
|
In article <1114030892.455207.200380@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> "Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> writes:
<<<It's amusing how many of these protectors of marriage are serial
divorcers and adulterers. >>>
Indeed:
Jim Bakker - adultery
Jimmy Swaggart - adultery
Bob Dole - adultery
Coulter - "Let's say I go out every night, I meet a guy have sex
with him. Good for me. I'm not married." Rivera Live
Helen Chenoweth (R - Idaho) - serial adultery
Sue Myrick (R- N.C.) - adultery
Henry Hyde - adultery
Bob Barr - adultery
Dan Burton - adultery
Bob Livingstone - adultery
Bob Packwood - sexual harassment
Steve Symms - (R- Idaho) - serial adultery
Newt Gingrich - adultery
Beverly Russell - (S. Carolina) - child molestation
Jim Bunn - (R - Oregon) - adultery
Jim Nussle - (R - Iowa) - adultery
Jim Longley - (R - Maine) - adultery
Enid Green - (R- Utah) - adultery
Joe Scarborough - (R- Florida) - adultery
Meredith Christensen ( Nebraska) - adultery
John McLaughlin - sexual harassment
George Will - adultery
Tim Hutchinson (R - Arkansas) - adultery
Sun Myung Moon - violence, adultery
Rudy Giuliani -adultery
George Roche III - adultery with his son's wife
Earl Kimmerling - child molestation
Mike Trout - adultery
Mike Bowers - adultery
Richard Delgaudio - ( he brought us Paula Jones) - child pornography
Ken Calvert - arrested for engaging with a prostitute
Matt Glavin - homosexual indecent exposure
Deal Hudson - sexual harassment of a female student
Edward L. Schrock (R-Va.) - married but solicited sex from male
homosexual
Al Regnery - left DOJ after porn discovered on his PC
Philip Giordano - sexual child abuse
Randal David Ankeney - attempted sexual assault on a child
Robert Bauman - homosexual sex with a minor
John Hathaway - sex with a minor
Stephen White - soliciting a 14 year old boy
Jon Matthews - indecency with a child
Earl "Butch" Kimmerling - child molestation
Paul Ingram - incest
Andrew Buhr - sodomy with a 12 year old
Keith Westmoreland - indecency with minors
John Allen Burt - molesting a minor
Parker J. Bena - child pornography
Larry Jack Schwarz - child pornography
Robin Vanderwall - soliciting sex with minors of both sexes
Marty Glickman - unlawful sexual activity with a minor
Dan Crane - sex with a minor (a Congressional page)
Donald "Buz" Lukens - sex with a minor
Well good god, no WONDER conservatives feel the family
is under attack! Clearly, anywhere they go, it manifestly is.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
20 Apr 2005 05:13:31 AM |
|
|
Sir Marksman wrote:
"Peacenik" <cnelsonpublic@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d44ii4$s5l$1@news.seed.net.tw...
"Sir Marksman" <kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Yes, it would. It would deny gays the right to marry.
Nope. Try again.
Okay. A Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as being between one
man and one woman would do the following:
A) Deny gays the right to marry their loves.
B) Deny fundamentalist Mormons the right to practice their religion.
C) Go against Christrian Doctrine.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 04:11:08 PM |
|
|
In article<_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com> "Sir Marksman" <kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> writes:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:k2qa61hvfndmr0mb6irti7updkf3l1krr2@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 08:20:20 -0700, drained his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed
the following
Doug says if America was, "To restrict freedom?" by not allowing legal
same sex marriage, "America is dead when that happens."
My comment was directed at the spectre of a Constitutional amendment
specifically denying rights to American citizens.
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Hey, a Constitutional amendment forbidding marriage between a man and
a woman would deny no one their rights -- as such would de facto no
longer be a right.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Marksman" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for special benefits for gays |
19 Apr 2005 05:00:58 PM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d43s5c$ok3$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article<_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com> "Sir Marksman"
<kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> writes:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:k2qa61hvfndmr0mb6irti7updkf3l1krr2@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 08:20:20 -0700, drained his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed
the following
Doug says if America was, "To restrict freedom?" by not allowing legal
same sex marriage, "America is dead when that happens."
My comment was directed at the spectre of a Constitutional amendment
specifically denying rights to American citizens.
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Hey, a Constitutional amendment forbidding marriage between a man and
a woman would deny no one their rights -- as such would de facto no
longer be a right.
Glad you agree with me.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 04:53:57 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article<_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com> "Sir Marksman"
<kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> writes:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:k2qa61hvfndmr0mb6irti7updkf3l1krr2@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 08:20:20 -0700, drained
his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed
the following
Doug says if America was, "To restrict freedom?" by not allowing
legal
same sex marriage, "America is dead when that happens."
My comment was directed at the spectre of a Constitutional
amendment
specifically denying rights to American citizens.
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man
and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Hey, a Constitutional amendment forbidding marriage between a man and
a woman would deny no one their rights -- as such would de facto no
longer be a right.
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 05:12:16 PM |
|
|
In article <1113947637.394251.189280@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "Al Smith" <> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article<_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com> "Sir Marksman"
<kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> writes:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:k2qa61hvfndmr0mb6irti7updkf3l1krr2@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 08:20:20 -0700, drained
his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed
the following
Doug says if America was, "To restrict freedom?" by not allowing
legal
same sex marriage, "America is dead when that happens."
My comment was directed at the spectre of a Constitutional
amendment
specifically denying rights to American citizens.
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man
and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Hey, a Constitutional amendment forbidding marriage between a man and
a woman would deny no one their rights -- as such would de facto no
longer be a right.
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I'm not sure what "weakening traditional marriage" might mean.
If Bob and Nancy start having problems with their marriage,
I'd find myself quite skeptical of any claims they might
make that "Lance and Bruce made us do it".
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 05:33:10 PM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:d43vo0$64g$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article <1113947637.394251.189280@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "Al
Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> writes:
[snip]
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I'm not sure what "weakening traditional marriage" might mean.
'Destruction/weaking of traditional marriage' is right-wing chruch tract
rhetoric. I remember hearing the same titty wringing bigots in the 60s
scream how inter-racial marriage was going to 'destroy traditional
marriage.'
If Bob and Nancy start having problems with their marriage,
I'd find myself quite skeptical of any claims they might
make that "Lance and Bruce made us do it".
I have to laugh when I hear that *****. If that's the case, Bob and Nancy
already have some serious issues that have nothing to do with Lance and
Bruce.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 06:08:28 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1113947637.394251.189280@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
"Al Smith" <> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article<_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com> "Sir
Marksman"
<kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> writes:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:k2qa61hvfndmr0mb6irti7updkf3l1krr2@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 08:20:20 -0700,
drained
his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed
the following
Doug says if America was, "To restrict freedom?" by not
allowing
legal
same sex marriage, "America is dead when that happens."
My comment was directed at the spectre of a Constitutional
amendment
specifically denying rights to American citizens.
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a
man
and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Hey, a Constitutional amendment forbidding marriage between a man
and
a woman would deny no one their rights -- as such would de facto
no
longer be a right.
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I'm not sure what "weakening traditional marriage" might mean.
If Bob and Nancy start having problems with their marriage,
I'd find myself quite skeptical of any claims they might
make that "Lance and Bruce made us do it".
More like after getting Nancy pregnant, Bob decides to break up instead
of marrying her. Bob is cynical about marriage because so many of them
end in divorce. Bob believes it's because anyone can marry at virtually
anytime.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 06:18:34 PM |
|
|
In article <1113952108.762531.86420@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> "Al Smith" <> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1113947637.394251.189280@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
"Al Smith" < > writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article<_qe9e.3232$mG3.1320@twister.nyroc.rr.com> "Sir
Marksman"
<kurt_lochner@hotmail.com> writes:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
message
news:k2qa61hvfndmr0mb6irti7updkf3l1krr2@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 08:20:20 -0700,
drained
his
beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed
the following
Doug says if America was, "To restrict freedom?" by not
allowing
legal
same sex marriage, "America is dead when that happens."
My comment was directed at the spectre of a Constitutional
amendment
specifically denying rights to American citizens.
A Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a
man
and a
woman would not restrict or deny any US Citizen any rights.
Hey, a Constitutional amendment forbidding marriage between a man
and
a woman would deny no one their rights -- as such would de facto
no
longer be a right.
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I'm not sure what "weakening traditional marriage" might mean.
If Bob and Nancy start having problems with their marriage,
I'd find myself quite skeptical of any claims they might
make that "Lance and Bruce made us do it".
More like after getting Nancy pregnant, Bob decides to break up instead
of marrying her. Bob is cynical about marriage because so many of them
end in divorce. Bob believes it's because anyone can marry at virtually
anytime.
Well, then, the problem has nothing to do with gay marriage and
everything to do with our "permissive" attitude towards divorce
and towards single motherhood. Things were quite different with
with regards to both these concepts when I was young.
And seeing as how society is currently suffering extensively
from both these problems -- assuming you indeed define them as
problems -- then I don't think it's actually because we MIGHT
allow gay marriage some day.
It's the het's doing, in fact.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 08:53:03 PM |
|
|
On 19 Apr 2005 16:08:28 -0700, "Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
More like after getting Nancy pregnant, Bob decides to break up instead
of marrying her. Bob is cynical about marriage because so many of them
end in divorce. Bob believes it's because anyone can marry at virtually
anytime.
Both my wife and I come from families where our parents divorced.. her
as a child, mine after all the kids had left the home. Has no bearing
on our marriage.
I feel sorrry for you, if you are so weak that what other people do in
their lives has so much influence on yours.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
20 Apr 2005 01:11:36 AM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 16:08:28 -0700, "Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and
drunkenly
proclaimed the following
More like after getting Nancy pregnant, Bob decides to break up
instead
of marrying her. Bob is cynical about marriage because so many of
them
end in divorce. Bob believes it's because anyone can marry at
virtually
anytime.
Both my wife and I come from families where our parents divorced..
her
as a child, mine after all the kids had left the home. Has no
bearing
on our marriage.
Anecdotally, it doesn't. Statistically, children of divorces are more
likely to divorce.
I feel sorrry for you, if you are so weak that what other people do
in
their lives has so much influence on yours.
Send me money if you really feel sorry.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
20 Apr 2005 01:35:19 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:53:03 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
I feel sorrry for you, if you are so weak that what other people do in
their lives has so much influence on yours.
Homosexuality appears to have a significant influence on your life to
the extent that you are a homophile.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
20 Apr 2005 09:41:40 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:35:19 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:53:03 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
I feel sorrry for you, if you are so weak that what other people do in
their lives has so much influence on yours.
Homosexuality appears to have a significant influence on your life to
the extent that you are a homophile.
I never even met an openly gay person until I was in my twenties.
How you doing finding those laws mandating fertility for marriage?
Anything yet?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
20 Apr 2005 10:52:18 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:qeqc6118k8knuikt78525gesp6iorgu96r@4ax.com...
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:35:19 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:53:03 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
I feel sorrry for you, if you are so weak that what other people do in
their lives has so much influence on yours.
Homosexuality appears to have a significant influence on your life to
the extent that you are a homophile.
I never even met an openly gay person until I was in my twenties.
It still doesn't stop you from being a nice person.
(Isn't that the defintion of "homophile"?)
Susan
How you doing finding those laws mandating fertility for marriage?
Anything yet?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 06:07:57 PM |
|
|
On 19 Apr 2005 14:53:57 -0700, "Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I am married. Are you?
Let me be clear: What two people decide about their decision to get
married does not affect my marriage in any conceivable way.
If two guys get married, I still love my wife.
If two women get married, we're still devoted to each other.
If 23 circus acrobats decide to get married, it doesn't matter to us.
Now, detail how same-sex marriage would weaken my marriage. Be
specific, and back up your claims.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "sangfroid" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 06:24:48 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:um3b615m0fjtpnl5s3tjfhh4laqtc9isv9@4ax.com...
On 19 Apr 2005 14:53:57 -0700, "Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I am married. Are you?
Let me be clear: What two people decide about their decision to get
married does not affect my marriage in any conceivable way.
If two guys get married, I still love my wife.
If two women get married, we're still devoted to each other.
If 23 circus acrobats decide to get married, it doesn't matter to us.
but the sex films could be rilly neat
whit
Now, detail how same-sex marriage would weaken my marriage. Be
specific, and back up your claims.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 08:02:30 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On 19 Apr 2005 14:53:57 -0700, "Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and
drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Good point. Imagine there were such an amendment and its dramatic
affects on society. Would just a little of this bad affect from
weakening traditional marriage be acceptable?
I am married. Are you?
Yes.
Let me be clear: What two people decide about their decision to get
married does not affect my marriage in any conceivable way.
I'm not talking about your marriage. Nor my marriage. I'm talking about
those who are going to become married and their perceptions of
marriage.
If two guys get married, I still love my wife.
If two women get married, we're still devoted to each other.
Even if one of those women is your wife? The reason I ask is if we
don't put a restriction on marriage, why not?
If 23 circus acrobats decide to get married, it doesn't matter to us.
This is where I believe you are wrong and you start to approach a
problem with gay marriage. When the minister asks, "Is it just the two
of you?" I don't believe it will be impossible for people to look at
marriage the same way.
Now, detail how same-sex marriage would weaken my marriage. Be
specific, and back up your claims.
Your wife could be a closeted lesbian.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 09:01:55 PM |
|
|
On 19 Apr 2005 18:02:30 -0700, "Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Douglas Berry wrote:
Let me be clear: What two people decide about their decision to get
married does not affect my marriage in any conceivable way.
I'm not talking about your marriage. Nor my marriage. I'm talking about
those who are going to become married and their perceptions of
marriage.
When my wife and I got married, the divorce rate in the US was over
50%. That did not stop us. We wanted to get married.
If two guys get married, I still love my wife.
If two women get married, we're still devoted to each other.
Even if one of those women is your wife? The reason I ask is if we
don't put a restriction on marriage, why not?
As long as I also cared for the third person, why not?
Oh, we're both bisexual and are part of the polyamory movement. We
deal not with one other woman, but several partners across three
continents.
If 23 circus acrobats decide to get married, it doesn't matter to us.
This is where I believe you are wrong and you start to approach a
problem with gay marriage. When the minister asks, "Is it just the two
of you?" I don't believe it will be impossible for people to look at
marriage the same way.
What minister? You can get married by an Elvis impersonator at 3AM in
Vegas! My sister's wedding was handled by our older brother, who is
not a minister (unless you count being part of the OTO as being a
minister), and you can get married by a court clerk!
Admittedly, poly marriages will require more tinkering with the law,
so I'm willing to wait on that.
Now, detail how same-sex marriage would weaken my marriage. Be
specific, and back up your claims.
Your wife could be a closeted lesbian.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
