Bible Discussion: Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" Of An Already-existing Right? Yes.

Same-Sex Marriage: "Redefinition?" No. "Recognition" Of An Already-existing Right? Yes.
Posts: 24

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)

GOOD RIDDANCE On Nov. 2nd To Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!
2004-10-09 10:04:06 EST

It's one of the favorite LIES of the dishonest and hateful
RRR cultists/homophobes. They WHINE that same-sex
marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage, while nothing could
be farther from the truth.

There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
same-sex marraige. And the rights already guaranteed by the
Consitution are sufficient to permit it. Therefore it has ALWAYS
been the right of any same-sex couple ro marry. If that weren't
the case, the loathsome RRR cult wouldn't have been so des-
perate to pass a (now crushed in both houses of Congress,
fortunately) Bigotry Amendment.

Thus we have merely been seeing a growing RECOGNITION
of an already-existing right, as it expands across North America,
and the world. And JUST like interracial marriage, once so
direly feared and whined-about by bigots -- it harms NO one.

And will BENEFIT hundreds of thousands.



-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>

(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.

And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.

The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...

Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---

http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html


AND...

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

ALSO worth a look:

http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html

And... here's what happens to people like you & me:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html

However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"

www.awolbush.com

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Dana
2004-10-09 11:25:46 EST
"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
<*2@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:4167ebad.121379551@netnews.mchsi.com...
They WHINE that same-sex
> marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage,

It is.



GOOD RIDDANCE On Nov. 2nd To Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!
2004-10-09 12:23:55 EST
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:25:46 GMT,
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
> Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
> Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:


>> It's one of the favorite LIES of the dishonest and hateful
>> RRR cultists/homophobes. They WHINE that same-sex
>> marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage, ...

> It is.

ONLY in the minds of people DUMB enough to be bigots.

>> ...while nothing could be farther from the truth.
>>
>> There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
>> same-sex marraige. And the rights already guaranteed by the
>> Consitution are sufficient to permit it. Therefore it has ALWAYS
>> been the right of any same-sex couple ro marry. If that weren't
>> the case, the loathsome RRR cult wouldn't have been so des-
>> perate to pass a (now crushed in both houses of Congress,
>> fortunately) Bigotry Amendment.
>>
>> Thus we have merely been seeing a growing RECOGNITION
>> of an already-existing right, as it expands across North America,
>> and the world. And JUST like interracial marriage, once so
>> direly feared and whined-about by bigots -- it harms NO one.
>>
>> And will BENEFIT hundreds of thousands.



-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>

(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.

And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Kerry -- two medals: a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well -- they don't give medals for
going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry -- a hero, Bush -- a zero.

The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening...
The Bush 'economic' policy: - 3 million jobs and counting...
The Bush Iraq lie: - 1,052 GIs, and mounting...

Having Bush louse up my country: Worthless

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---

http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html


AND...

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

ALSO worth a look:

http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html

And... here's what happens to people like you & me:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html

However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"

www.awolbush.com

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Bard Kesnit
2004-10-09 13:46:17 EST
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:25:46 GMT, "Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:

>"GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!"
><xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote in message
>news:4167ebad.121379551@netnews.mchsi.com...
>They WHINE that same-sex
>> marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage,
>
>It is.

Which definition of marriage are you talking about? The
polygamy (both 1 man, many woman and 1 woman, many men) found in some
places throughout history? The one-man, two-woman that some
archeologists believe was the norm in very early human history?

Bard Kesnit

Dionisio
2004-10-09 23:13:02 EST
Dana wrote:

><xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
>They WHINE that same-sex
>
>
>>marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage,
>>
>>
>It is.
>
>

Got a problem with tradition, take it up with the dead. Marriage was
redefined to be valid between people of differing faiths. Marriage was
redefined to be valid between people of differing social classes.
Marriage was redefined to be valid between those of differing races.
Marriage was redefined to be valid between folks of differing
generations. Marriage has been redefined so many times that redefinition
has become a tradition. And society needs tradition.


--
The danger for what the press derisively calls the 'Religious Right' is that they are making the same mistakes the religious left made. To solve the moral problems of the nation they are looking to government rather than the Creator of their faith and His strategies.


Damien
2004-10-10 02:03:56 EST
x*2@mchsi.com (GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!) wrote in message news:<41740f3f.130486478@netnews.mchsi.com>...
> On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:25:46 GMT,
> "Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
> > Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
> > Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
>
>
> >> It's one of the favorite LIES of the dishonest and hateful
> >> RRR cultists/homophobes. They WHINE that same-sex
> >> marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage, ...
>
> > It is.
>
> ONLY in the minds of people DUMB enough to be bigots.
>
> >> ...while nothing could be farther from the truth.
> >>
> >> There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
> >> same-sex marraige.

Same sex marriage is an oxymoron. Call it a civil union if you want.
What do we call what we traditionally mean by marriage if same sex
couples are to be 'married'? They are two very different types of
relationship.

Dana
2004-10-10 03:07:52 EST
"Dionisio" <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
news:2N1ad.30055$V06.25515@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
> Dana wrote:
>
> ><xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
> >They WHINE that same-sex
> >
> >
> >>marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage,
> >>
> >>
> >It is.
> >
> >
>
> Got a problem with tradition

Nope, that is why marriage is between a man and a woman.



Patrick Lee Humphrey
2004-10-10 05:37:33 EST
"Dana" <dems@losers.com> writes:

>"Dionisio" <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
>news:2N1ad.30055$V06.25515@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
>> Dana wrote:

>> ><xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> >They WHINE that same-sex

>> >>marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage,

>> >It is.

>> Got a problem with tradition

>Nope, that is why marriage is between a man and a woman.

What rights of *yours* are being denied if same-sex marriage is allowed? This
married heterosrxual male can't find a single right of mine it's affecting.

--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2004-05 Houston Aeros)

Bard Kesnit
2004-10-10 10:00:27 EST
On 9 Oct 2004 23:03:56 -0700, legend_89@hotmail.com (Damien) wrote:

>Same sex marriage is an oxymoron. Call it a civil union if you want.

Seperate but equal, isn't.

>What do we call what we traditionally mean by marriage if same sex
>couples are to be 'married'?

Marriage.

>They are two very different types of relationship.

Not at all. Both are (in theory) based on mutual love and
respect for another person.

Bard Kesnit

Dennis Kemmerer
2004-10-10 11:35:10 EST
"Damien" <legend_89@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:260fc7ca.0410092203.27a6c1aa@posting.google.com...
> xanadu222@mchsi.com (GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest
> Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!) wrote in message
> news:<41740f3f.130486478@netnews.mchsi.com>...
>> On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:25:46 GMT,
>> "Dana" <dems@losers.com> wrote:
>> > Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> ("GOOD RIDDANCE on
>> > Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!") wrote:
>>
>> >> It's one of the favorite LIES of the dishonest and hateful
>> >> RRR cultists/homophobes. They WHINE that same-sex
>> >> marriage is a "redefinition" of marriage, ...
>>
>> > It is.
>>
>> ONLY in the minds of people DUMB enough to be bigots.
>>
>> >> ...while nothing could be farther from the truth.
>> >>
>> >> There is NOTHING in the Constitution that would prohibit
>> >> same-sex marraige.
>
> Same sex marriage is an oxymoron. Call it a civil union if you want.
> What do we call what we traditionally mean by marriage if same sex
> couples are to be 'married'?

The term 'marriage' seems to be working just fine so far in all of the
places where same-sex couples are being married.

> They are two very different types of
> relationship.

Only in your narrow-minded imagination.


Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron