U.S. Federal Marriage Amendment 88 replies

Please wait...

!moof

Note to self: Find pants.

50 XP

19th October 2002

0 Uploads

2,321 Posts

0 Threads

#81 14 years ago

What do you mean?




vivanolaq

Glucose, Gas, and Styrofoam

50 XP

5th May 2004

0 Uploads

352 Posts

0 Threads

#82 14 years ago
by me Can anyone give a reason to outlaw gay marriage that has nothing to do with religion?

None of you have yet to anser this question. Does this mean you are trying to create laws based on religion? If so, you know nothing about the American constitution and thus should not be allowed to hange it. Now, the only real reason that I have found in this thread to vote yea on the FMA was posted by moof in his opening statement, but that problem could be as easily resolved for voting against it. So, once again, can anyone give a reason to outlaw gay marriage that has nothing to do with religion?




Admiral Donutz VIP Member

Wanna go Double Dutch?

735,271 XP

9th December 2003

0 Uploads

71,460 Posts

0 Threads

#83 14 years ago
'Dreadnought[DK']i find it scary that the government 'needs' to make an amendment that makes it possible for two people to marry or enter a civil union or whatever you call it. it is the same as passing an amendment that secures equal opportunities for men and women. these things are natural rights, they don't need to be granted; they are there in the first place!

exactly! and yup i support gay marriage.




redm VIP Member

Mr. redm

50 XP

10th June 1998

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#84 14 years ago

Dont be so stupid. I can support anything I want soley on a religious basis. And if I support a law that ties into religion, so be it. Nothing wrong with that.

You talk about the constitution, and not being in the spirit of it etc but dont give me that. If we were living in the late 1700's and this had been an issue, I garuntee you they would have put it in the Constitution. The point is they never imagined this issue arrising.

So you tell me, am I wrong, would the founding father's be supporting gay marriage. I think not.




vivanolaq

Glucose, Gas, and Styrofoam

50 XP

5th May 2004

0 Uploads

352 Posts

0 Threads

#85 14 years ago

The Founding Fathers would not have cared. It is not an issue that the government should burden itself with. And you cannot back up a consttutional amendment with a religious arguement, that contradicts the Constitution. No one has the right to force religious beliefs on any other person. Yes that includes you redm.




redm VIP Member

Mr. redm

50 XP

10th June 1998

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#86 14 years ago

"The Founding Fathers would not have cared."

HAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA

THATS THE BIGGEST LOAD OF SHIT I'VE EVER HEARD. Perhaps you should spend a little more time studying history.




redm VIP Member

Mr. redm

50 XP

10th June 1998

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#87 14 years ago
vivanolaqThe Founding Fathers would not have cared. It is not an issue that the government should burden itself with. And you cannot back up a consttutional amendment with a religious arguement, that contradicts the Constitution. No one has the right to force religious beliefs on any other person. Yes that includes you redm.

I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone, other's are infact forcing the desire to be `married` onto me.

My belief is that marriage between a man and a woman. I hate to tell you but its not just mine, its the entire world up until this recent movement. I'm trying to retain my beliefs. :uhoh:




Admiral Donutz VIP Member

Wanna go Double Dutch?

735,271 XP

9th December 2003

0 Uploads

71,460 Posts

0 Threads

#88 14 years ago
redm(...) My belief is that defining marriage as between a man and a woman. I hate to tell you but its not just mine, its the entire world up until this recent movement. I'm trying to retain my beliefs. :uhoh:

exept for the billions of people who don't :uhm: many people support gay marriage and do not defines marriage as between a man and a woman. the church does say that marriage is between man and women but goverments don't have too and shouldn't since chruch and state should be (kept) seperated. Its perfectly ok to have the goverment defining marriage as between a man and a woman while the chruch doesn't, you don't have to marry in a church, you can marry in goverment buildings aswell (cityhalls in holland).




redm VIP Member

Mr. redm

50 XP

10th June 1998

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#89 14 years ago

You mistook what I said but instead of arguing about it.. this topic has been beaten to death..