Michael Hardner Posted January 20, 2010 Report Posted January 20, 2010 The Advocate The NOH8 Campaign on Wednesday announced that Cindy McCain, the wife of former Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, has posed to demonstrate her support of marriage equality. Good for her. It's good to see that some Republicans can admit that time has come for change. Certainly, it will open up debate a little more in the US, though how much remains to be seen. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Oleg Bach Posted January 20, 2010 Report Posted January 20, 2010 Hypocrites who know that 80% of hetrosexual marriages end badly - this showing that most straight people do not respect the opposite sex or the normal insitution of marriage...so why in hell are they promoting same sex unions and not their own unions? Quote
Oleg Bach Posted January 20, 2010 Report Posted January 20, 2010 In other words family first! Loyality to spouse - to off spring.. to tradtion that sustains the family is paramount to the survival of it...What I see with the typical divorced soccer mother type is that they take great glee in declaring and promoting the gayification of young adults and children - It is because they have issues as far as power and dominace regarding males..be careful of any female that promotes the demasculinization of the male population...you will find in time that those females will attempt to take on the roles of abusive and dominating alpha males... There is always a hidden and very personal agenda regarding the empowerment of one group over another. Quote
Shady Posted January 20, 2010 Report Posted January 20, 2010 Cindy McCain - pro Gay Marriage Big deal. So is Dick Cheney. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Posted January 21, 2010 Big deal. So is Dick Cheney. Really. I thought he was from Wyoming ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Oleg Bach Posted January 21, 2010 Report Posted January 21, 2010 Big deal. So is Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney had no choice - nature played a funny trick on him and gave him a prodical son in female form. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted January 21, 2010 Report Posted January 21, 2010 Mike - going to be useful tomorrow and perform at a fund raiser for the Haitian people..my daughters raised a lot of cash in the last few days - the eldest has been with the Red Cross for a few years now - I guess I raised my kids right and am a success after all..cheers! Quote
Bugs Posted January 21, 2010 Report Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) Just curious ... Why are you so celebratory about this obvious sop to a fringe group? Marriage, after all, is a relationship between members of the opposite sex, and having to do with the creation of a family. That's what defines what it is, in culture after culture ... a special relationship between people of the opposite sex, and who plan to raise children together. Marriage never was legally discriminatory. Homosexual or heterosexual, anyone could get married. All they had to do was find someone of the opposite sex that was willing. Forcing a change in the definition of marriage doesn't change homosexual practice one whit. There's no new fetish associated with it, no new erotic degradation to celebrate, no new disease to pass about. The same strange figures will still lurk around the public washrooms of malls and bus terminals. The lattes at the Church Street Second Cup will get no frothier. Homosexuals aside, what are the real motivations here? Is it a fear of being taken for a bigot if one doesn't admire this latest emperor's new clothes? No real barrier has come down, after all. In fact, in Canada, same sex marriage brought with it zero new 'rights' ... Is the problem with marriage that it doesn't satisfy homosexual's self-esteem needs? (Gosh, it didn't satisfy my self-esteem needs either.) Is the marginality of homosexual relationships be due to the fact that homosexuals have transient, often anonymous sexual relations, with no permanency something the Courts should address? Why is the state that has no business in the bedrooms of the nation now think that homosexual self-contempt is that something that the state has a role in obviating? Who knows these things? Lawyers aren't going to tell you the truth. What really is happening here is that their are a set of 'special rights' that marriage has ... such as the practice of excusing spouses from testifying against each other. "Hey," say the big foreheads at the Law Schools, "I don't have anyone who can't testify against ME". They complain, "It's discrimination." The effect is to take things away from heterosexual marriage. It's not a gain in Liberty. OK, that's stupid enough to fool the courts ... but why does it fool you? Edited January 21, 2010 by Bugs Quote
Shady Posted January 21, 2010 Report Posted January 21, 2010 Really. I thought he was from Wyoming? I wasn't aware we were discussing his home state. I thought we were talking about gay marriage? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Posted January 21, 2010 Just curious ... Why are you so celebratory about this obvious sop to a fringe group? I'm happy for them. Marriage, after all, is a relationship between members of the opposite sex, and having to do with the creation of a family. That's what defines what it is, in culture after culture ... a special relationship between people of the opposite sex, and who plan to raise children together. Having to do with, but actually not necessarily linked to the creation of a family. And queer folks can have families too. Marriage never was legally discriminatory. Homosexual or heterosexual, anyone could get married. All they had to do was find someone of the opposite sex that was willing. Forcing a change in the definition of marriage doesn't change homosexual practice one whit. There's no new fetish associated with it, no new erotic degradation to celebrate, no new disease to pass about. The same strange figures will still lurk around the public washrooms of malls and bus terminals. The lattes at the Church Street Second Cup will get no frothier. And they can get married. Homosexuals aside, what are the real motivations here? Is it a fear of being taken for a bigot if one doesn't admire this latest emperor's new clothes? Whose motivations ? No real barrier has come down, after all. In fact, in Canada, same sex marriage brought with it zero new 'rights' ... The right of queers to marry, though. Is the problem with marriage that it doesn't satisfy homosexual's self-esteem needs? (Gosh, it didn't satisfy my self-esteem needs either.) Is the marginality of homosexual relationships be due to the fact that homosexuals have transient, often anonymous sexual relations, with no permanency something the Courts should address? No, it's because they weren't accepted in law before and were not accepted by our culture. Why is the state that has no business in the bedrooms of the nation now think that homosexual self-contempt is that something that the state has a role in obviating? I also believe the state has no role in marriage, however if there are to be intersections between the state's business and our personal relationships there shouldn't be exclusion for gay people. Who knows these things? Lawyers aren't going to tell you the truth. What really is happening here is that their are a set of 'special rights' that marriage has ... such as the practice of excusing spouses from testifying against each other. "Hey," say the big foreheads at the Law Schools, "I don't have anyone who can't testify against ME". They complain, "It's discrimination." That's an odd take on it. I've never heard that before, but ok - I guess that's another benefit of marriage. The effect is to take things away from heterosexual marriage. It's not a gain in Liberty. OK, that's stupid enough to fool the courts ... but why does it fool you? Who is fooling who ? As I said, I'm happy that queers can now get married where they couldn't before because they were discriminated against. Pretty simple, all in all. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Posted January 21, 2010 I wasn't aware we were discussing his home state. I thought we were talking about gay marriage? Sorry - he is from Wyoming. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Shady Posted January 21, 2010 Report Posted January 21, 2010 Sorry - he is from Wyoming. What does his pro gay marriage stance have to do with Wyoming? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Posted January 21, 2010 What does his pro gay marriage stance have to do with Wyoming? That's exactly the point ! Sorry, Shady, I'm just having fun. Sense of humour, etc. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Moonlight Graham Posted January 22, 2010 Report Posted January 22, 2010 I just don't agree with this, because the humans who interpret what other previous humans translated from portions of a book that was written by other humans who tried to remember oral stories as told to them by other humans about what other humans interpreted from what God "said" say that gay marriage is wrong. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Oleg Bach Posted January 22, 2010 Report Posted January 22, 2010 Time to forget about this subject and move on..Like I said earlier - those that do not stand up for the rights of traditional marriage which is failing in general have no buisness standing up and pushing the rights of gay unions - take care and repair straight unions first. It's astounding that the perponents of gay marriage are usually those straight people who utterly fail at traditional marriage. Quote
Moonlight Graham Posted January 22, 2010 Report Posted January 22, 2010 Time to forget about this subject and move on..Like I said earlier - those that do not stand up for the rights of traditional marriage which is failing in general have no buisness standing up and pushing the rights of gay unions - take care and repair straight unions first. I agree. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.