How would you vote for a ban on *** marriage and why?
Bastion asked:
Here in the Golden State, there is a measure (prop
which would allow or ban *** marriage. How would you vote?
Here in the Golden State, there is a measure (prop
which would allow or ban *** marriage. How would you vote?
And for the people who are going to quote the bible, there all all kinds of things that are condemned in the bible but not illegal. What if I want to nail as many supermodels as possible? Should we ban that too? How does this effect you anymore than *** people getting married?
Caffeinated Content
August 17th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Kansieo.com
yes
one man
one woman
check any dictionary
August 20th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Website content
Our Lord Jesus loves all of his children and wants us to be happy, so if being *** and married makes then happy and that makes Jesus happy then I am happy
August 20th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Caffeinated Content
I would vote no because it’s bigotry that would keep people second class citizens.
August 22nd, 2008 at 6:37 am
marriage
Even without religious beliefs, homosexuality isn’t right for humans. Only a male and a female make babies. It’s the natural order of things. (I understand some species of bugs and lizards use homosexuality to reproduce but that’s because they only have that ***.)
And Tim, Jesus didn’t come here to make us happy, he came here to save our souls. If he did only wish our happiness, no bad stuff would ever happen.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 am
Caffeinated Content
Personally, and not from a Bible thumper point of view, I feel marriage is a man/woman thing. I just do. Same *** should have civil unions and have all the benefits of such (insurance, rights of property, etc…)
Voting? No, I would not vote against it.
August 24th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Website content
I would vote to allow it
The reason being that if it makes them happy to be together in a civil union then go for it. They deserve to be happy just as much as a traditional couple.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:58 am
Website content
I would vote against a ban on *** marriage, because I am a patriot, not a bigot.
People who want to prevent equal rights **** America and use the Constitution for toilet paper. They should move to Saudi Arabia.
and Ken, here’s Webster’s dictionary definition.
Main Entry: mar·riage
Pronunciation: \?mer-ij, ?ma-rij\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
Date: 14th century
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite *** as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same *** in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close union
August 27th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Kansieo.com
I would vote to ban ********** marriage…………..
Abomination to God — plain and simple…………..
August 30th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Caffeinated Content – Members-Only Content for WordPress
I’m voting no, because all it does is add discrimination to the California constitution. It doesn’t protect anything except the interests of some Christians, which, by the way- there’s something called separation of church and state. We’re not supposed to make laws based on religious beliefs of some.
September 1st, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Create a video blog
Marriage is a legal institution. The government has no right to ban any two people who are of age from it. Honestly, though, I think we should start requiring a civil ceremony for people to be legally married. If they want a religious ceremony or other party afterwards, that’s fine but this would help people finally learn to differentiate between civil and religious unions.
September 4th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Caffeinated Content
I would vote against it.
If two people love each other they should be allowed to get married!!
September 4th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Caffeinated Content
I am for *** marriage
man and man
woman and woman
man and woman
as long as they love each other.
September 7th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Website content
Well while we’re at it then maybe we should allow ********** and beastiality too.
September 9th, 2008 at 4:47 am
Create a video blog
Being transgender, I’d obviously vote in favor of *** marriage.
September 12th, 2008 at 7:30 am
Create a video blog
I would vote against such a ban. I do not believe that such a ban would serve a useful purpose. If people of the same *** wish to marry, they would be taking care of each other (thus, less need for public medical cost sharing), there would be less promiscuity and therefore perhaps less AIDS (how can that be bad?!). I don’t see it as harming anybody. If these people have dependent children it would be to the children’s benefit to be in a home with two adults since that generally means a higher income and more supervision and many studies show that this generally correlates with less drug abuse, fewer teen pregnancies, and higher academic success. Even if the Bible can be used to support a ban, that is not sufficient reason for the state to oppose *** marriage, since we have freedom of religion in this country. Suppose someone is *** but not a believer in the inerrancy of the Bible? Are such folks not bound by scripture? Suppose I found a law against non-gay marriage in the sacred book of some other religion. Could I then ban marriage between a man and woman on that basis? That would be tantamount to the same thing. If a man and woman objected that they were not followers of this hypothetical religion and should not be bound by its bizarre strictures, how is that any different from what I have just argued? I am neither *** nor *******. I am married to a man and I am a woman. I really don’t think seeing two men together, hand in hand is going to change that. Neither would the sight of two women kissing each other. Actually, neither would the sight of two monkeys standing on their heads! So why should I want to put laws on the books against such things?
September 12th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Caffeinated Content
Absolutely no banning *** marriage for me:
“10 Reasons Why *** Marriage is Wrong”
01) Being *** is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
02) *** marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
03) Legalizing *** marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if *** marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. *** couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
07) Obviously *** parents will raise *** children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
08) *** marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10) *** marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
September 14th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Kansieo.com
If I were to vote on the ban of *** marriages…I would vote NO. I believe that everyone has a right to do what they want. We are suppose to live in a free land…right? If that is so how can someone take away a right that is not theirs to take away. I believe that gays have just as much right to have a same *** spouse as someone straight has at having a spouse.
September 17th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Caffeinated Content – Members-Only Content for WordPress
yes! And to the second question…yes!
September 19th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Caffeinated Content – Members-Only Content for WordPress
I would vote for the ban because *** marriage was never legal in the first place.
In 2000 61% of the voters passed a proposition to define marriage between a man & woman only. Then just this year just four judges chose to take away the voice of the voters and make *** marriage legal, against 61% of the population of California.
September 21st, 2008 at 4:14 am
Caffeinated Content
let me just say one thing, i saw a commercial when i was watching t.v on the propositons of *** marriage and i was sickened.
it was saying “you dont want your kids to be faggots”
its discusting.
if i could vote, wich i cant because im in canada, i would vote for whatever proposition to vote for *** marriage, who cares if a man loves a man or a woman loves a woman? its their lives, they can live it how they wish to all that matters is if they love eachother.
September 24th, 2008 at 3:03 am
Create a video blog
I’m voting yes on 8 but not for a ban on marriage, I’m voting for it to protect my right to educate my kids in a traditional Christian setting.
Unfortunately this is a campaign that is set in a way that if one side wins the other looses. Since the illegal overturn of prop 22 by 4 activist judges marriage has been taught in schools with activists telling my daughter what’s right and what’s wrong ignoring our religious beliefs and parental rights.
About your example, the notion of you going out and nailing as many supermodels as you can to me is just as bad if not worse than *** marriage.
I’m voting to protect my rights, I’m fighting to keep the definition of marriage as it traditionally has been.
September 26th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Caffeinated Content – Members-Only Content for WordPress
i VOTE IN favor of *** marriage. To each his or her own. Live and let live..
September 28th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Create a video blog…instantly.
Homosexual supporters talk about “equality” and all, but what is the difference if CONSENTING ****** or polygamists want to marry as well. Are you also a supposed “bigot” if you don’t want those groups to marry? If you’re throwing out words like “equal rights” and “bigot,” then at least don’t be hypocritical and be against incest/polygamy marriage, for they could make the EXACT same argument that gays can for the altering of the very specific definition of marriage.