Constitution amendment  

rm_2giveyou 36M
19 posts
6/7/2006 7:18 pm

Last Read:
7/29/2006 5:33 pm

Constitution amendment

Ive decided to talk about something that has no controversy what so marriage.
Now first off I feel the need to say that I'm not gay, many of you out their know I'm straight but for the sake of my writings today I feel the need to put that in here.

Right now the President is pushing for a constitution amendment banning gay marriage. And of course this is the right time to push for such a thing since you still have two separate wars going on at the same time ( Afghanistan, Iraq ) and a ton of other problems that affect the nation more then weather or not two people of the same sex want to get married.

To get deep into this issue I need to make something clear for all the conservatives out their treating this as the biggest thing since sliced bread. The United States has a separation of church and state, not to protect religion from the government but to PROTECT THE GOVERNMENT FROM RELIGION! The reason for this is to make it so when a law is passed your not just passing it in favor of your political base, it also has to be right for everyone else in the country as well. (And not just for the Protestant, Catholics, ECT).

What happens when we look at the Constitution? Well take a look at this?! It says right here that all men are created equal. And if all men ( and women ) are equal that means they have the same rights, which means a gay man has the same opportunity as a straight man! So when you look at it that way they should be able to get married.

Now I know your going to ask me "But what's your opinion?"

Well here it is, if they want to get married...let them! So what if two people who love each other want to get married. I care about whats right and so should the government.

RevJoseyWales 70M/67F
14393 posts
6/7/2006 9:01 pm

It's called "wag the dog", a tactic that the Bush regime is quite good at. Bush could really care less about gay marriage. This is being brought up now because of the few elections held this week, the dissatisfaction fo the religious right, and the myriad of problems this country is facing hefre and abroad. Something to take our minds off the real problems, much like immigration was used recently. Joe

"McVeigh had the right idea, wrong address."

"This ain't Dodge City, and you ain't Bill Hickok."


6/7/2006 9:02 pm

Well said darlin'.

SirMounts 103M

7/15/2006 2:14 pm

Hey, how about those who want three-way marriages? Or group marriages? Or marriages to children? Can we really deny... their happiness, too?
The problem in changing what marriage means, is that it no longer has a serious meaning, ever again. It's been around forever as it is, because it has worked forever, as it is.
- - -
Hey Joe, do you really believe that George W. Bush is the root of all evil? When you stubbed your toe the last time, did the President do that to you, too???

itsall4you20053 57M/48F

7/15/2006 6:47 pm

2give you-- your problem with the web site is the same problem we are having. It's called censorship, if you criticize those that hold the power in this country, they will target you and interfere in your life in ways that you have never considered. It wouldn't matter if you are as pure as a new born child. They will manufacture whatever they need too,to try to destroy you. We had addressed many of the same topics you have in our extended questions on our profile, only to see our thoughts erased and Altered. If you have read it and not discovered our thoughts on same-sex marriage than our thoughts have been blocked all together..

SirMounts 103M

7/21/2006 12:14 am

    Quoting rm_2giveyou:
    I think you're taking it a little over board don't you think?
    And no I don't think Bush is the root of all evil, but he's coming pretty close.
Well, such comments by that author appear in a number of places, and invariably strike Me - and I would guess every rational person regardless of their beliefs - as quite mean spirited.
However, yours don't... though of course we disagree on that particular matter. I very much appreciate calm, respectful debate. It is becoming... all too rare.
^5's and thanks, 2giveyou.

SirMounts 103M

7/21/2006 12:17 am

In respect to the comment by... itsall4you20053, do ya see what I mean? Anything goes. Doesn't matter if it's true anymore.

itsall4you20053 57M/48F

7/26/2006 6:38 pm

First of all we wish everyone in blog land a hearty hello, and for a few of you a question or two. Have you been to mass today? And how do you prefer your daily dose of corruption, you prefer it straight up in a shot glass, or over the rocks with a twist of lime? We think it's rather amazing that the largest organization that is opposed to same-sex marriage is the Catholic Church. They also hold the heavyweight title belt of being the one organization that is responsible for more crimes perpetrated against humanity than any other entity..SirMounts.. Holds the opinion that same-sex marriage somehow takes away the sanctity of marriage as it exists today. Well let's examine this, some figures on the divorce rate in this country place it at 68 percent, so correct me if I'm wrong if my math hasn't failed me that's over two-thirds of all marriages ends in divorce! So we guess the other third fight it out to the bitter end. Maybe we're just too much of a skeptic but if you show us a married couple today we say, now there goes a couple of gamblers. As far as gays marrying and being in a monogamous relationship they probably deserve a standing ovation from the general public that has placed the Aids epidemic at their feet, another misconception held by a population with little mines! As for your comments on group marriage and marrying children, we are passing all kinds of laws preventing same-sex marriages however, in many parts of this country it is still legal to marry your 14-year-old first cousins!

SirMounts 103M

7/27/2006 2:15 am

Well, you are absolutely right about high divorce rates... although you will find that the rate itself has held pretty steady over the years at 50 percent.
I am not opposed to gay marriage as a separate issue. I oppose changing the definition of marraige in any way, including with more than two adults, children, and animals for that matter. If the "one man one woman" concept is changed - and traditional marriage has been with us for the entire history of civilization - to also include "one man and one man" and "one woman and one woman"... then what prevents "two men and one woman" or "three men and eight women"? The answer is... nothing would prevent it. After all, don't a group of people in love deserve happiness too? You know how the courts would rule.
To destroy the traditional concept of marriage is to destroy the basic, traditional family. Marriage and family has served us well. We are fools to fool with it.

Become a member to create a blog