Senate Kills Anti-Gay Amendment

[Ryan]

And to the 48 who voted for it, let me be the first to say

Equality, Common Sense, and the US Constitution: 1
Moralist, Senatorial, Neocon Nannies: 0

[Satchel]

Amazing that 48 people voted to amend the constitution over gay marraige


my favorite quote:

"I would argue that the future of our country hangs in the balance because the future of marriage hangs in the balance," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a leader in the fight to approve the measure.

[Ryan]

Originally posted by Satchel
Amazing that 48 people voted to amend the constitution over gay marraige


my favorite quote:

"I would argue that the future of our country hangs in the balance because the future of marriage hangs in the balance," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a leader in the fight to approve the measure.

This guy actually believes that heterosexuals are going to stop getting married if gays are ever allowed to wed. I can't believe seemingly intelligent people can be this irrational and stupid.

[Satchel]

I think it just ruins his perfect little ideal of what marriage is

boo hoo

[question]

I heard Bush spouting off something about marriage being a sacred religious bond. What about all the non-religious hetero couples that get married??

Originally posted by Ryan
This guy actually believes that heterosexuals are going to stop getting married if gays are ever allowed to wed. I can't believe seemingly intelligent people can be this irrational and stupid.

[bfp]

Good news. It's a states issue. So long as we have the DOMA.

[thefncrow]

Originally posted by Satchel
Amazing that 48 people voted to amend the constitution over gay marraige


my favorite quote:

"I would argue that the future of our country hangs in the balance because the future of marriage hangs in the balance," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a leader in the fight to approve the measure.

You missed the bigger boneheaded quote from him:

The amendment "is to provide moms and dads for the next generation of our children. Isn't that important? Isn't that the ultimate homeland security -- standing up, defending marriage, defending the right for children to have moms and dads, to be raised in a nurturing and loving environment? Isn't that what this debate is all about?" asked Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., on the Senate floor Wednesday.

So apparently gay people == terrorists who are incapable of love.

[Satchel]

holy shit I guess I did

[bfp]

He has a right to his opinion.

Throughout civilization, the proper way to build a healthy family is to have a legal bond between a man and a woman, specifically for the next generation(eg sons & daughters).

Does anyone disagree that the best way to raise a child is with a mother and a father? Doesn't a child need both figures in life? Every civilization has agreed that by promoting a marriage between a mother and a father is the healthiest.

I guess it's complete bigotry to even think such things.

[Satchel]

Do you realize the sheer mass of childern raised in one or no parent families that has NOTHING to do with gay people at all?

How does gay people getting married in any way effect a man and a women from raising thier children as a unit?

[bfp]

Originally posted by Satchel
Do you realize the sheer mass of childern raised in one or no parent families that has NOTHING to do with gay people at all?

How does gay people getting married in any way effect a man and a women from raising thier children as a unit?

None whatsoever? It would seem that the numerous pieces from the AP over the past few years would prove otherwise. I am constantly seeing pieces on, say yahoo or cnn talking positively about gay parenting. Are you kidding me?

I personally, am not offended by it, but throughout civilzation- the reason marriage between a man and a woman was so significant was for that reason.

A healthy society.

[Satchel]

Can't gay parenting be positive without it affecting straight couples? Do you see a scenario where a straight couple gives up their kid to a gay couple because they saw it on yahoo?

Originally posted by bfp
Good news. It's a states issue. So long as we have the DOMA.

DOMA is a violation of Full Faith and Credit and should be struck on that basis.

Originally posted by bfp
He has a right to his opinion.

Throughout civilization, the proper way to build a healthy family is to have a legal bond between a man and a woman, specifically for the next generation(eg sons & daughters).

Does anyone disagree that the best way to raise a child is with a mother and a father? Doesn't a child need both figures in life? Every civilization has agreed that by promoting a marriage between a mother and a father is the healthiest.

I guess it's complete bigotry to even think such things.

I wouldn't call it bigotry. Short sighted? Perhaps.

I agree that having a mom and a dad is optimum for raising a child. But it's just one of many scenarios that are optimum for it. The bottom line with children and marriage is that there needs to be a stable enviroment of unconditional love for it to work. It's silly to say that a hetero marriage is the only scenario that provides such a thing.

[johnny861]

I was never worried about that being a Constitutional amendment... Cause I knew it was never going to happen.

What I was shocked about was the number of people that did support it... I was thinking there's about 15 to 20 of them that would, but it was interesting to see more people supported it.