BREAKING: New Jersey Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same-Sex Unions
BREAKING: New Jersey Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same-Sex Unions
The New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled that “same-sex couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals in New Jersey, but that lawmakers must determine whether the state will honor gay marriage or some other form of civil union,” the AP reports.
From the ruling:
HELD: Denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. The Court holds that under the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, committed same-sex couples must be afforded on equal terms the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes.
UPDATE: AmericaBlog highlights President Bush’s comments from 2004:
I don’t think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that’s what a state chooses to do so. … I strongly believe that marriage ought to be defined as between a union between a man and a woman. Now, having said that, states ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
PERFECT TIMING! This puts the gay marriage agenda front and center again….
Iraq will fade, gay marriage moves forward, and Ohio will fall back in line.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:20 pmWhat a surprise? MA and now NJ. Good for humans. Strangely enough NY supreme court did not see it this way.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:21 pmAhh Jason….so deluded. We can always count on you.
PS - don’t for get to take your meds!
October 25th, 2006 at 3:22 pmOff to Gitmo for these treasonous activist Judges the Christian Taliban will scream. The gull that “these” people have the same rights and priveleges!
October 25th, 2006 at 3:23 pmJason M Hendler,
People are now realizing what kinds of hypocrits you guys are. Republicans have gays and pedophiles. Everybody sees that you are no different than any other group. You just like to preach hate and then keep your gays in the closet.
Foley
October 25th, 2006 at 3:24 pmKolbe
Craig
Oh, keep wishing. Good folks will wake up and realize that the US Supreme Court nominations are at stake, and will make sure that Lamont and Webb lose, lose, lose ….
October 25th, 2006 at 3:28 pmOh my GOD - these people have moved in right next door. I must immediately divorce my wife and find a nice man to settle down with. Or a dog.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:28 pmJMH,
I’m not going to back down from you until you tell me the difference between “sexist comment†and “sexual harassmentâ€, then apologize to trueblue.
Ready to do so?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:29 pm#5, you forgot Gannon!!
October 25th, 2006 at 3:30 pmJust another godless state, that New Jersey! They may be the Garden State, but it’s definitely no Garden of Eden.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:34 pmI’m sure the right wingers will come up with even more New Jersey hate speech.
America’s Least Wanted
If you read what the court ruled it is more on the order of domestic rights than marriage rights. Where do you think little Tommy Kean falls on this issue? I do not believe this issue is a silver bullet for the Republicans. Yes, we will hear about it on the nightly news and the wingnuts will blather on — but, on election day it will be Iraq, Iraq, Iraq.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:36 pmSo Republicans would rather let US soldiers die than gays marry. Is that what you posit?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:37 pm#8, PLC,
Up yours! Any woman that is going to step into the arena is going to pounded, if she chooses to swing first. No apologies for trueblue who runs the first time she gets hit with her own weapon.
#11, btru,
The Foley incident only hurt gays, as you will see in the upcoming election
October 25th, 2006 at 3:38 pm#15, ox,
Not at all, this will cement the motivation needed for Repubs to turn out to vote. It will probably further dampen turnout in black communities, where gay marriage is extremely unpopular.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:39 pmOh, keep wishing. Good folks will wake up and realize that the US Supreme Court nominations are at stake, and will make sure that Lamont and Webb lose, lose, lose ….
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler
Sounds like you’re the one with the wishful thinking…
What on earth makes you conclude THAT? Ma and Pa Kettle continually debate Supreme Court probabilities and appointments…?
The SC has nothing to do with it. The intolerance, fear, and ignorance spouted by the right is the driving force behind electoral travesty like what happened in Ohio.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:42 pmWhere do you come up with this stuff — this will have zero impact on turnout — the Pastor-in-Chief has turned on his flock. They are not going to vote like they did before — and, if my precinct is any indication, the Democrats are angry and already voting — 20% absentee rate.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:43 pmI like how the opinion written by the judge looks at it from the side of how the homosexuals have been ensured equal rights outside of marriage but have been denied the rights afforded to marriage and how legally this does not make any sense. Because it doesn’t. Either they are equal citizens or they are not.
It’s not that homosexuals should be given marriage rights its that they can’t be denied them for no other reason than bigotry.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:44 pmCool.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:44 pmI’m very angry, and know Jesus is as well. Sinners within their state judicial system decided to complete this bill. I will send an email to the Supreme Court to overturn this decision. Homosexuals, read Leviticus, Mark, and Genesis. Your actions are disgusting and perverted, it’s equivalent to molestation and rape. I will pray for the state of New Jersey.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:44 pmJason, do you genuinely feel that gay marriage is the most important issue facing Americans? Or do you just feel that it is the issue most likely to mobilize the Republican base?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:46 pmThe Foley incident only hurt gays, as you will see in the upcoming election
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler — October 25, 2006 @ 3:38 pm
Hastert is gay? Boehner is gay? Every repub scrambling to remove themselves from this scandal is gay?
And once again, you ignorant fool, being GAY and being a PEDOPHILE SEX OFFENDER are two different things… but I wouldn’t expect a narrow minded homophobe to immediately get that.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:46 pmTake that BUSH!
October 25th, 2006 at 3:47 pmSociety is NOT obligated to afford homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couple, any more than society is obligated to support polygomy, beastiality or any other deviant behaviour. Once again, the voters will have to drive that point home to you.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:49 pmPLC,
Thank you very much for standing up for me this morning. I just logged back on and read your comments. Thank you.
I will not respond to his delusional and offensive comments, because all I’ve ever said is that he should be ignored.
Thus I continue to ignore him now. I truly hope he does the same.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:49 pmThe Foley incident only hurt gays, as you will see in the upcoming election
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler — October 25, 2006 @ 3:38 pm
And the Foley incident hurt the chances that a court would find anti-gay marriage laws discriminatory? Seems you can’t even keep the debate consistent across topics.
You need to pull your head out.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:49 pmSorry Daryll.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:50 pm15 JMH
“Up yours”?? Why how immature and intellectually limited!
trueblue did NOTHING to warrant your comment, other than suggest that the rest of us ignore you. If you’re going to step into THIS arena with comments like you made, YOU’RE going to get pounded.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:52 pm#8, PLC,
Up yours!
October 25th, 2006 at 3:52 pmComment by Jason+M.+Hendler
Spoken like a true gentleman. Is there any wonder why you’ve never experienced any type of relationship with a woman.
As to NJ, I say, “Step in the right direction!” At least they are not flatly denying rights to gays.
You all probably know I live in MA, where gay marriage is legal.
It’s actually touching to see the looks on the faces of those now able to be fully recognized as a family unit.
Who the heck are we to deny love?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:53 pmSociety is NOT obligated to afford homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couple, any more than society is obligated to support polygomy, beastiality or any other deviant behaviour. Once again, the voters will have to drive that point home to you.
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler
Rick. Rick Santorum. Is that you? And don’t you all think that last sentence outs Jason, I mean Rick, as a Log Cabin Republican.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:53 pmDaryll, I think you should be praying to have the nation delivered from George Bush…….
October 25th, 2006 at 3:54 pmSociety is NOT obligated to afford homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couple, any more than society is obligated to support polygomy, beastiality or any other deviant behaviour. Once again, the voters will have to drive that point home to you.
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler — October 25, 2006 @ 3:49 pm
Pray tell, what IS society obligated to do for ANYONE?
Society is defined by those in it, and I prefer to live in a society that supports, encourages, and provides for its citizens…
What society do YOU live in? The society of New Jersey has decided that the issues of discrimination and oppression are more important than removing the ability for two loving human beings to marry.
LIFE, LIBERTY, PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
Moron.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:55 pmtrueblue
At this point, you should absolutely ignore him. But I won’t (maybe can’t is more accurate), especially if he makes even more comment to you that does not start and end with “I’m sorry, I was wrong”.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:56 pmDaryll
What did Jesus say was the basis for ALL his laws and commandments?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:56 pmtrueblue,
You have made very sexist and disparaging statements towards me on other occasions, so don’t cry when I find your weak spot and pound it. Ignore me all you want, but the truth of my words continue to playout in politics, economics, etc.
Since you, Zooey, Sharon Cox and other women on this site continue to be beligerent, then I will continue to hit you where it hurts.
PLC,
Bring it if you think you got it, but your posts are the same empty diatribes about why progs should be in power, while the rest of the country votes you down. You will never learn.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:57 pmActually, I do want an answer to this question Mr Hendler.
What is society obligated to do for anyone? By stating that society is NOT obligated to do something you are implying that it is obligated to do something else… What do you see that obligation as being?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pmGeorge Bush says he is a Christian, but one can see, through his actions, that he does not follow the teachings of Jesus. Of course, that falls in line with the compassionate conservative agenda, which is to pay lip service to “moral values” then enact policies that screw the poorest American citizens.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pmKudo’s to New Jersey. People like JMH don’t get it. Same-sex marraige is a fight between religious fear and the desire to be treated equally under the law. Historically, only one side ultimately wins that battle. I’ll give you a clue: It’s not the religious people. Like dlet says: We can’t exclude a group of people from enjoying the same legal rights as everyone else. It didn’t work with women and blacks. Why should it work with gays?
Religions can exclude anyone they want from the marriage ceremonies and can forbid their priests from presiding, but since when does the church get to tell the government what legal benefits it can bestow on its citizens, especially ones who do not subscribe to their religion?
October 25th, 2006 at 3:59 pmActually, I do want an answer to this question Mr Hendler.
What is society obligated to do for anyone? By stating that society is NOT obligated to do something you are implying that it is obligated to do something else… What do you see that obligation as being?
Comment by Technodaoist
I’ll second that.
October 25th, 2006 at 3:59 pmjason has used the word “pound” quite a bit in this thread…
just an observation.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:00 pmThis thread must be stirring up all kinds of confusing feelings for Jason.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pm#40, Technodaoist,
Gay couples have had their rights upheld to live their lives free from harassment, but it is a different thing to ask society to sanction that behaviour through the institution of marriage.
Personally, I have no problem with either gay marriage or civil unions. My problem is the use of judicial activism to achieve what the legislative process doesn’t. Eventually, the US Supreme Court will strike down gay marriage, thanks to voters exercising their right to choose their representatives.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pmPLC,
Please ignore the taunts. Everyone who knows me knows I save my slightly sexual comments for Juan!
(he’s just so darned sweet!)
He shows his colors again and again.
He’s not worth it.
I don’t know if it’s because of his Asperger’s Syndrome, but frankly I don’t care enough at this point to even research it.
Way to go, NJ!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pmThe concept of equal rights under the law is just so liberal and un-American. Heaven forbid we should “hold these truths to be self-evident”.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pmThey shouldn’t receive domestic rights because the sexual the acts they’re committing are wrong. There’s nothing right about homosexuality. They’re individuals that are carrying out evil acts. I know I have George Bush and other Republicans on my side. We will demolish this state bill. If I have to protest in New Jersey, I will. Now, I’m really contemplating whether or not to attend netcentric training in NYC because that means I have to cross through that sinful state.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmHey Darryl, I’ve read Leviticus. You’re not eating shrimp or lobster are you? Oh wait, that’s right, Jesus told Paul in a vision that you could eat you some pork and stuff right? No cynical attempt to include gentiles there right? Oh and thank goodness they don’t have to get circumsized either. I wonder if Christianity were born in Greece or Turkey if Jesus mightn’t have appeared to Paul and said buggery was okay too.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmJason is society obligated to demonize same sex couples?
October 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmPlease do remember, Daryll, that there are no degrees of sin. So sexual immorality (in all it’s forms, fortunately not based on your opinion) is just as bad as, say, lying, stealing, not taking care of the poor and killing innocent people.
Get the plank out of your eye, man.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmstates rights! states rights! …
or, maybe not…
October 25th, 2006 at 4:04 pm#46, Will,
Churches aren’t telling the government anything. US voters are telling their congressmen in voice and in votes, that they do NOT want gay marriage, by anywhere from a 70 - 90 percent election result.
You want to turn this into a church vs. state issue, but the voters understand it is a legistive process vs. judicial activism, and they choose legislative every time.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:05 pmJason, dude, let go of your anger
It is quite apparent you’ve been rejected (hurt) by many a female. It is also quite apparent that you’ll never enjoy a relationship with a woman having that type of attitude.
Relax, take a deep breath. A major part of Christianity is forgiveness. Take time to forgive all those women who hurt you in your past (and present).
Eventually, if you follow these steps, you’ll have less hatred and cruelty in your heart, and may even have a nice conversation over dinner with, (gasp), a lady.
Of course, the above is null and void if you’ve suspended your Christianity
October 25th, 2006 at 4:05 pmThe concept of equal rights under the law is just so liberal and un-American. Heaven forbid we should “hold these truths to be self-evidentâ€.
Comment by lw
There’s that “Reality-based liberal bias” again! :)
October 25th, 2006 at 4:05 pmSince you, Zooey, Sharon Cox and other women on this site continue to be beligerent, then I will continue to hit you where it hurts. Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler
Thats Republican code for “Women should shut up and cook”. Huh Jason, can’t handle a woman with a voice, and some pants on.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:05 pmThe answer to these issues is to remove tax considerations based on marital status from the tax code. Then let the marketplace decide how it wants to price its products and services according to market pressures. This would alleviate the need by people to object to same sex marriages by denying them benefits afforded to opposite sex marriages. They could no longer make the case that their tax dollars were involved.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:06 pmIt’s the perfect time for this decision. I mean, it’s not like the GOP can pretend to have values any more, so this doesn’t help them.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:06 pm.
JMH
Our battle now isn’t about an “progressive” agenda, it’s about your lack of basic civility. I’m more interested in being morally centered and correct than being a “winner” in the world, including the political arena. You attacked a fellow human being without provocation and don’t give me any excuse or justification about what trueblue might or might not have done in the past, because YOU are responsible for what YOU did today. Two wrongs do not make one right. You owe her an apology, which cleans YOUR slate. Then, if in the future I see a post in which she makes a sexually charged comment to you, I can challenge her. Take a look at your post 43 on this thread. You went after trueblue when your issue is now with ME as true said nothing to you.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmSociety is NOT obligated to afford homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couple, any more than society is obligated to support polygomy, beastiality or any other deviant behaviour. Once again, the voters will have to drive that point home to you.
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler
A little friendly education for you; calling something “deviant” is simply calling it different than what is normal.
In response to your statement; YES, a society that preaches that you can live your life the way you see fit, free from religious and legal persecution as long as you don’t trample on anyone else MUST grant EQUAL rights to ALL it’s citizens. I personally believe that anyone should be able to form a family unit however they feel is best and what they do in their own bedrooms is not my business unless they are forcing someone to participate against their will. Yes, although I don’t like it, that includes polygamy.
It’s not my obligation to like other peoples lifestyles, but it IS my obligation to PERMIT it, just like I don’t agree with Christian Fundamentalists, but I can’t and wont support a law banning their churches.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmActually, this is a pretty responsible ruling. It throws the issue into the hands of the New Jersey legislature. The legislature can enable it with legislation or disable it with a Constitutional Amendment.
From a practical standpoint, watch the Republicans spin this hate card effectively. It likely will assure that the Democrats will lose the Senate races in New Jersey, Virginia, Missouri and Tennessee.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmGo ahead and cheer for NJ. It is one more wakeup call to the Republican voters - just ahead of the election.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmThe same Leveticus says not to touch pig skin but you homophobes aren’t protesting football every damn Sunday! What gives?!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmChurches aren’t telling the government anything. US voters are telling their congressmen in voice and in votes, that they do NOT want gay marriage
That’s nice, but this isn’t about gay marriage. Why don’t you read it?
The president and a majority of Americans support civil unions.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:09 pm.
Is it possible the GOP is against this because of the money, and they use the “values” argument to fire up tools like Jason?
Think about how this would effect big business, insurance, settlements etc.
I think its about not wanting to pay benefits and social security to that many more people.
Hendler you are a dupe.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:09 pmIt is one more wakeup call to the Republican voters - just ahead of the election.
Right, because the GOP is soooooooo good at the values thing, right?
Whoops! Not any more.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:09 pm.
#46, Will,
Churches aren’t telling the government anything. US voters are telling their congressmen in voice and in votes, that they do NOT want gay marriage, by anywhere from a 70 - 90 percent election result.
You want to turn this into a church vs. state issue, but the voters understand it is a legistive process vs. judicial activism, and they choose legislative every time.
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler — October 25, 2006 @ 4:05 pm
This is why everytime an elected official comes out against gay marriage they always invoke God? This is why the only argument against it comes down to letting gay marry somehow threatens heterosexual marriage? This is why legislatures are voting WITHOUT polling their constituents to see how they feel? This is why those legislatures who DO vote against permitting gay marriage are LOSING votes?
I don’t think so.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:10 pm#62, For Truth,
I am not telling these women to shut up, just that I will hit them as they hit me. I don’t mind it, I viewed it a playful banter until trueblue cried and ran away, and then PLC butted in.
Say whatever you want, but I will come right back at you.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:10 pm52 trueblue
Your wish is my command. You’re a trooper.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:10 pmSociety is NOT obligated to afford homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couple, any more than society is obligated to support polygomy, beastiality or any other deviant behaviour.
No one is born a polygamist, dumbass. Then again people like you are too stupid to tell a blastocyst from a human being, so what should I expect?
Once again, the voters will have to drive that point home to you.
Two words: Terry Schiavo. Every time the superstitious freaks try to legislate their ignorance the American people reject them.
This isn’t Saudi Arabia, you know.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:12 pmbut you homophobes aren’t protesting football every damn Sunday! What gives?!
Because their faith is as phony as their patiotism.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:13 pm.
#67, DallasNE,
You are dead on! As I stated in an earlier post, I support gay marriage or civil unions, so I don’t really care which way this goes, as long as the rights of US voters aren’t trampled on in the process. The Dems wanted to lawyer their way through an issue, instead of starting off will civil unions, which has much broader support. Because the Dems were so arrogant and condescending towards Christians, they refused to take that path, and now they are paying for it - as it should be.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:14 pmSo, using this crazy circular logic, it will hurt Foley, Kolbe, Craig, Gannon, Cheney’s daughter and Bush.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:16 pmCivil rights issues should never be put to a “popular” vote. Can you imagine people voting on interracial marriages? Every law-abiding, tax-paying American citizen should have the same rights.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:16 pmPLC,
You’re a hero!
When you look back you can see that he simply wants to get your attention.
Not giving it is the best thing to do.
My daughter had *one* temper tantrum with me.
Realized real quick it wouldn’t work, and moved on.
It’s the same principle here.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:16 pm:) You’re the best!
Can you imagine people voting on interracial marriages?
In that case, interracial marriage would not have been legal until 1991.
We burned off those freaks, we will burn off these freaks. They’re the dead weight of our civilization, always dragging us down.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:19 pm.
#82, blah buh blah,
This is a representative Democracy. All rights and priveledges are subject to ratification and review. This will eventually bubble up to SCOTUS and gay marriage will be ended, until the US Congress takes up the issue.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:19 pmFinally I’m one step closer to marrying my toaster.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:21 pmActually I’m an Osterizer Mormon. I believe in marrying multiple kitchen appliances. Especially the new ones if you know what I mean, yeah I’m looking at you hands free can opener. It’s all very godly of course. It’s right there in the apocrypha, book of HamiltonBeach Scovill. Hey what I do with my air popper in the privacy of my home is none of your damned business.
“I will pray for the state of New Jersey.”
Daryll, you had to pray for Rush the other day. Are you sure you have the time for all that praying? Maybe you should give up posting here so you can pray some more.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:21 pmWow, talk about crazy Christian.
The Dems just won a court ruling and this crazy phouc thinks we lost.
Up is down
Black is white
War is peace
Winning is losing
Crazy phouc
October 25th, 2006 at 4:23 pmTritoneSubstitution,
October 25th, 2006 at 4:24 pmThat Is Funny!
Good One!
My problem is the use of judicial activism to achieve what the legislative process doesn’t. Eventually, the US Supreme Court will strike down gay marriage….
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler — October 25, 2006 @ 4:01 pm
JMH is so friggin out of it, he doesn’t even realize the direct contradiction and or hypocrisy of the two consecutive sentences he himself posted above! Why is it always called “judicial activism” whenever the independent courts come down with a ruling that the uber-reich wing fascists like Jason don’t like, but whenever the courts rule in their favor (oh, say, a particular ruling by the Supreme Court in December 2000 that got us into the Bush fantasyland we’re now in), that’s “upholding the rule of law”???
Hey Jason — chill out. You morons already control all three branches of the government — at least for two more weeks, anyway. Then, the people of this country will take it back from the fascists and their enablers like you, and put America back together again. And then you’ll be free to crawl back under your rock and suck your thumb and cry over and over again to yourself “it was judicial activism”…
October 25th, 2006 at 4:24 pmWeren’t you just arguing that the SCOTUS is liberal? Make up your damned mind you crazy phouc.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:24 pmI’m very angry, (boo hoo) and know Jesus is well. Sinners within their state judicial system decided to complete this bill (what bill?, which sinners completed what???. Please make some sense in your sentences). I will send an email to the Supreme Court to overturn this decision (They’ll be sure to overturn themselves upon reading your communication) . Homosexuals, read Leviticus, Mark, and Genesis, then Cather in the Rye, Go see Blazing Saddles and Star Wars). Your actions are disgusting and perverted, it’s equivalent to molestation and rape (Oh come now, among consenting adults?). I will pray for the state of New Jersey. (Don’t bother, no one’s listening.)
October 25th, 2006 at 4:25 pm#90, Spudge,
I have never been more certain of a Republican win than I am hearing the news of this gay marriage “win”.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:25 pmThis will eventually bubble up to SCOTUS and gay marriage will be ended,
Who’s talking about gay marriage? The president and the Jersey court support civil unions.
… until the US Congress takes up the issue.
Uh, no. The conservative position, as reinforced by George Bush during the 2004 election, is that this is to be decided at the state level.
Sorry, but you bigots lose again.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:25 pm.
Wow, talk about crazy Christian.
What makes you think he’s a Christian? There’s nothing Christian about the anti-gay position unless you both deny Christ’s sacrifice on the cross AND selectively read the Old Testament. Not much of a Christian.
Then again, anyone can call themselves a Christian.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pm.
They shouldn’t receive domestic rights because the sexual the acts they’re committing are wrong (nor should anyone who does it doggy style). There’s nothing right (wing) about homosexuality. They’re individuals that are carrying out evil acts. I know I have George Bush(, Jeff Gannon) and other Republicans on my side. We (Me and my buddy Jesus) will demolish this state. If I have to protest in New Jersey, I will (Attn: NJ, get a can of whupass out and at the ready). Now, I’m really contemplating whether or not to attend netcentric training in NYC because that means I have to cross through that sinful state. (Yeah, bettering myself isn’t as important as stepping foot on cursed soil)
October 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pmCan anyone provide me even one reason to deny homosexuals of consenting age from marrying, without relying on a particular religious viewpoint?
My religious belief is based on the words of Jesus that ALL of God’s laws and commandments are based on LOVE. Leviticus contains a host of directives, loving presented to insure the survival of the fragile Hebrew tribe. Homosexual and heterosexual rituals were being used by pagan worshipers, enticing the Hebrews away from their culture. Love was not part of the equation, so there are admonitions against sexual immorality - love without sex. Homosexuality is not, in and of itself, a sin nor is heterosexuality, as long as love is involved.
So, does any government have a right to limit my religious belief and how I might choose to act on it? For what secular reason.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:29 pmYikes,
Daryll isn;t praying for anything. He actually belives that CHristmas has something to do with Adam and Eve. Go check out THink Fast for this morning. He asked why people that don’t believe in Adam and Eve would celebrate Christmas.
Does this crazy phouc actually think Jesus was born on December 25?
Maybe he thinks Santa Claus and Jesus hang out together?
Does he not know that Christmas is based on what Saint Nickolaus did in real life?
crazy phouc
October 25th, 2006 at 4:29 pmbut it is a different thing to ask society to sanction that behaviour through the institution of marriage.
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler
That is the problem. Jason you are confusing two things. As a thinker such as yourself often does you are muddling what is legal and what religion tells you. The “institution of marriage” does not guarentee tax breaks, spousal privilege, inheritence, etc. to heterosexual or homosexual marriages. It is the State legislation that does. Thats why the State can’t discriminate against a group of people if they are going to call them equal citizens of the State. The church can do whatever it wants…well almost.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:29 pm88 - Yikes, I second that emotion!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:30 pmThe problem is that you are a stupid phouc with your head up your rectum.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:30 pmI’ve never been more certain that JMH is a big whinner. Go take your fancy high falootan antennea and see if your ship is here to take you home.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:31 pmRepublicans act as though homosexuality is the biggest of sins, yet for some reason it was left off the ten commandments. Hmm, what were those sins? What were the sins Jesus actually talked about? Who did Jesus talk to and who killed him? He talked to the poor and downtrodden. The conservative elites are the ones who wanted no challenges to their power so they had him killed. He was willign to accept the sins of others and forgive them, but republicans are not. Isn’t christ the same person who said those without sin cast the first stone? I guess that means most republicans believe they are sin free. I know the president thinks that way, because he has said that he has not made any mistakes. MA and Daryll you really do need to brush up on your theology and toss the talking points aside becuase the theology of Christ has NOTHING to do with republican policy.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:33 pmJesus Hendler !
I leave here 6 full hours ago to, you know, lead a life. I come back and you are still here ranting. I can only assume that you’ve spend the whole business day here.
As I said before, you must only come here to get attention becuase no one else will give you any.
For your own sake, get a life. Are you a “welfare queen” (your words from an earlier post and your sel-professed king) or do you just have the most dead end job on the planet?
Could be worse I guess. You could have spent the day volunteering to retain the Republican majorities instead of just wishing for it real hard.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:33 pmVERY selectively.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:34 pmRomans 1:26-27: “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error which was meet.
This is for you libs that stated that God never condemned homosexuality in the New Testament. He also condemned it in Genesis. Homosexuals, stop your evil ways because your path is leading you to hell.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:34 pmHe asked why people that don’t believe in Adam and Eve would celebrate Christmas.
Uh, because I worship Mithras, the Light given birth by the virgin, son of Ahura Mazda? That’s the holiday, folks, including the shepherd and the star, a story told before Christianity in another religion. Christmas is a stolen holiday. It has nothing to do with Christ. No one knows what time of year Christ was born.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:35 pm.
I have never been more certain of a Republican win than I am hearing the news of this gay marriage “winâ€.
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler
and I have never been more certain that all of your anger stems from having never experienced a woman
October 25th, 2006 at 4:35 pmThus your sexual advances….on the internet? (pathetic)
#106, monger,
Reps can take care of themselves - I needn’t lift a finger to advance their causes.
You assume wrong, I only logged on an hour ago to take up the mantle again.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:37 pmmonger,
You bring up a good point. Why would anybody of sane mind spend all day long in a place where they are hate, unless they were either 1) paid by R0ve or 2) just plain nuts/stupid. I have never even once visited redstate. Why would I. So, why do the trolls come here? They all say they are educated, so that rules out stupidity (not), so it has to be that they are paid by Rove.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:37 pm“He asked why people that don’t believe in Adam and Eve would celebrate Christmas.”
Are you shitting me? Poor Daryll. I guess he and all the right wing nutbars shouldn’t take Labor Day off as they don’t seem to believe in it. I love getting and giving gifts on christmas and I love the time off work too. I never forget to put milk and cookies out for Santa.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:37 pmOld lightbulbhead Pat Robertson is on the hotline right now with God arranging a catastrophy for NJ. and I’m going to put up my twin satellite dishes(my raised palms) and listen in.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:38 pmIf a civil right is only granted, then why did the Founding Fathers talk about “inalienable rights”? Civil rights are either DENIED or SUPPORTED.
If the government can limit who you marry or the privileges you can be denied if you “marry wrong”, can the government decide you must “honor the Sabbath”? (Interestingly, our former “blue laws” were a lousy attempt at that - limiting what could be done on Sunday which is NOT the Sabbath. Bad government and bad theology.)
Why does the government and society support second, third, fourth…etc marriages when this is clearly against the Bible?
October 25th, 2006 at 4:39 pmJMH, you know we don’t need society to approve to get equal treatment under the law. The 14th amendment sees to that. If society decided that only christian marriages should be sanctioned would that be okay? Of course not. What about a person who is a hermaphrodite whose parents elected to raise them as a female but identifies themselves as a male? What sex do you “sanction” their marriage to? Who decides? You? A majority of voters? The decider himself?
October 25th, 2006 at 4:40 pmI sure hope you have never gottne a blow job or had anal sex Daryll, because they fall into the sodomy category.
Then again, you beleive Jesus was born on December 25. Crazy phoucer.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:40 pm#110, DRxJ,
Just pathetic personal attacks, no arguments, no debate …
Enjoy the losses in two weeks time. It will give you something fresh to be mad at ….
October 25th, 2006 at 4:40 pmHeb 13.1 Look it up Daryll
October 25th, 2006 at 4:41 pmJason+M.+Hendler, oh+dem+poor+darkies, unlike these sinners, we have Jesus on our side. I know he’ll help us overturn this legislation.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:41 pmHeb 13
October 25th, 2006 at 4:42 pm1Keep on loving each other as brothers.
Daryll, your getting behind in your prayers. No go forth and kneel and pray.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:43 pm#111, btru,
Uh, you just committed libel ….
I seldom if never work anyone longer than an 8 hour day - never needed to do that to make a fortune - unless they were paid overtime, often at a premium, but again, rarely.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:43 pmComment by oh+dem+poor+darkies
That was nice, real nice. Thank you for posting that rant, it made feel young again, like I was back in high school — how sophomoric!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:43 pmHey, look! A Jesus Veto!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:43 pmWhat next, a Biblical Bill of Rights?
Do you even know what the hell “mantle” means?
Tell me which definition you are using here:
I am gonna go with:
to be or become covered with a coating, as a liquid; foam
Because you probably have been hanging around with Mark Foley.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:45 pmDaryll YOU ARE PATHETIC
Bigots like you do not deserve to claim to be “Christian”! Have you ever met a homosexual? Would you say these hate filled things if your daughter or son or brother or sister was gay? You hatred is depressing. My best friend is a lesbian and she has to deal with hate filled individuals like you on a daily basis. Jesus believed in respect, compassion, understanding, and love, all qualities you clearly do not have. If you hate gays so much then ignore them, and let them live their lives the way they want. This is a DEMOCRACY where everyone is entitled to certain inalienable rights. Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness come to mind. By denying homosexuals the RIGHT to marry we are obstructing thier right of pursuit of happiness. You and your kind are not TRUE AMERICANS, you are FASCIST PIGS!!!!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:46 pm#118, Tritoris,
As I stated before, I support gay marriage or civil unions, but not the method by which Dems prefer to ratify it - judicial activism. Legislatures should be forced to deal with this issue, as we have elected them to do.
As for hermaphrodites - they can have either one.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:46 pm“Bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the
majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful,
must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights,
which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be
oppression.” –Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801.
“The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime,
October 25th, 2006 at 4:47 pmabuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest
breaks up the foundations of society.” –Thomas Jefferson to Pierre
Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816.
RUCerious, I love everyone in an agape manner, but I hate their sinful deeds. Accept it, Jesus condemned homosexuality in the New Testament. Homosexuals, stop your wicked ways.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:48 pmLook at Daryll supporting a lowlife that refers to homosexuals as faggots with a heart full of hate. Jesus LOVES you alright. Your imaginary friend has alot of SCUM as friends as well.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:48 pmHey
October 25th, 2006 at 4:49 pmIs that Rosie O’Donnell in the blue T?
#131, PLC,
No one is oppressing homosexuals. They just need to use the same process we all use - the legislative process - and not the courts.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:49 pmBy denying homosexuals the RIGHT to marry we are obstructing thier right of pursuit of happiness. Comment by NewProg
…and freedom of assembly, and freedom to enter into a contract, and freedom of religious belief.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:49 pmJust pathetic personal attacks, no arguments, no debate …
Enjoy the losses in two weeks time. It will give you something fresh to be mad at ….
Comment by Jason+M.+Hendler — October 25, 2006 @ 4:40 pm
October 25th, 2006 at 4:50 pmYou lost all credibility when you attacked trueblue, PLC, sharon et al.
shucks dude, you can dish it out, but you can’t take it, can ya?
But now, finally,since you’ve actually responded to me, let’s discuss this Dan Quayle “potato conspiracy theory”, shall we?
Mantle? Yes,I was in love with Mickey Mantle, the shame!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:50 pmLev 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:50 pmSo, it is pretty damn clear. That’s why they’re building the Halliburton cleansing chambers.
This is for you libs that stated that God never condemned homosexuality in the New Testament.
Romans was written by Paul of Tarsus, not God.
See? Another phony Christian. The place is lousy with ‘em.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:50 pm.
No one is oppressing homosexuals. They just need to use the same process we all use - the legislative process - and not the courts.
Right, ’cause none of US use the courts, right?
Phony Christian, phony American. He doesn’t know the first thing about either.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:52 pm.
What makes you think none of us are Christians, because you read a Mann Coulter book? You are a scumbag and God will make you answer for that.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:52 pmYa, Daryll,
He’ll surely Smite us all…………………….
Why don’t you stop all the hating and embrace the love that Jesus talked about?
Gay Marriage in MA, and we’re all just fine!
October 25th, 2006 at 4:54 pmWe have not been “Smote” off the Earth.
We’re Here. We Let Queers Marry. Get Used to It!
#141, Grandmal Seizure ….
They can sue all they want, but activist judges shouldn’t writing laws.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:55 pmOh-dem-poor-blackies
You call yourself American? You are not. You do not belive in “liberty and justice for ALL.” You are a hate filled bigot like Daryl. You were the people who voted against inter-racial marriage, you are the people whose ancestors supported slavery. People woke up to your hate and are becoming more and more supportive of homosexuals. If you look at the polls you will see this. In my state (wisconsin) they put gay marriage on the ballet, and I was appauled. Think about this, In 1860’s if slavery was put on the ballet, I am pretty sure it would still exist. Hopefully more people wake up and support the homosexual cause,
Oh and quit the religious bullshit. The is a DEMOCRACY not a THEOCRACY. If you want to live in a THEOCRACY move to Iran and leave us alone…
October 25th, 2006 at 4:55 pm#108 would that be from PAUL’s letter to the Roman’s? Sounds like Paul was condemming, That is nto a Jesus wuote, but that of a mortal man.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:56 pmAnd so, if our elected representatives pass an unconstitutional law, it is not for the courts to strike it down, it is for the majority of the voting public. Too bad for Mr. Hendler there’s 203 years of jursiprudence based on Marbury v. Madison we’d have to overturn in order to compete his desires for a Fascist state.
Mr. Hendler and others would have the Constitution apply only to those whose lifestyles they approve of. And they bring in the specious argument about beastiality or pedhphilia (Which, by the way Daryll, the origial versions of the Bible proscribed, not homosexuality per se. Look up pederasts. That’s what the original term translated to.)
Gay marriage is about eliminating gender discrimination when it comes to whom one can or cannot love. It’s also about eliminating religious discrimination, when there are religious sects that do recognize and perform gay marriage ceremonies which are not recognized by the State, whereas other religion’s gender-biased marriages are recognized by the State.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:56 pmThe Bill of Rights has already been enacted and stands as the law and guiding principle of our land. The legislature, either by its representing the will of the people or by responding to any referrendum of the people, cannot deny the rights of any individual. Therefore, the legislature cannot, in my opinion, enact a law that denies equal access to a marriage contract by homosexuals. It is specifically the charge of the courts to interpret whether or not the Constitution has been violated by the enactment of or administration of any law. Since there are “marriage laws” in every state, the court can and must rule on them if there are questions of individual rights raised.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:56 pmHey NewProg #129 and everyone else ragging on Daryll - are you not able to pick out ringer when you read one - this guy (or gal) is a great parodist (must must must be) and I congratulate him (or her) on this scam)
October 25th, 2006 at 4:57 pmYou too JMH - you just aren’t funny enugg to be in Daryll’s league.
NewProg, Once again, I’m not a bigot. I love everyone, but hate sinful deeds. If you are a Christian, you should uphold what’s right. There’s more to the bible than “Love thy neighbor” (Ten commandments, beattitudes, etc.). Christian means Christ-like. If you’re not following biblical laws then you aren’t Christ-like because Jesus said, “I am the word”. Really think about your soul. If Jesus came back at this moment, based on biblical law, would you be ready to leave with him?
October 25th, 2006 at 4:57 pm#131 PLC, No one was oppressing blacks in the south in the 60’s. They just need to use the same process we all do. Ropes and trees.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:58 pmJHM it’s hard to take you seriously with that argument. You support an expansion of freedoms but you say that it should only be done through legislation? Let me ask you this; Is it judicial activism for a court to say that something is already covered and guaranteed by the existing legal framework and to inform the executive of that determination? If that is not the province of the judiciary then what is? It is their job to interpret and apply law. It’s that simple. You don’t want gays to marry do you? If you think that it is right that gays should be allowed to do so but only disagree with the method of it’s determination what can we say about your support of freedom? That it’s based entirely on process. Was Plessy v. Ferguson overturned correctly by Brown v. Board of Education? Seems like your idea of freedom is a little anemic.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:58 pm#149, Bris,
Keep dreaming. Conservatives will stack the courts and keep a lid on judicial activism, since you can’t trust libs to follow the processes that they were elected to uphold.
October 25th, 2006 at 4:58 pmOPEN QUESTION TO OUR SELF-PROCLAIMED LEGAL EXPERTS
Exley, Mighty Afraudite,
What was the level of scrutiny applied by the court in this case?
Was it the appropriate level of scrutiny?
October 25th, 2006 at 4:59 pmI’ve got more New Testament Scripture for you so called “Christian Homosexuals”.
1 Corinthians 6:9
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
October 25th, 2006 at 5:01 pmIf you’re not following biblical laws then you aren’t Christ-like because Jesus said, “I am the wordâ€.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:02 pmWhat a load of crap.
Following his teachings is a great way to live your life.
Following the idiotic teachings of the Bible literally translated will guarantee we live in the Medieval dark ages forever.
You don’t have to swallow religious organizational BS to live a spiritual life.
Oh, and Daryll…Bite me.
Hey Darryl and the rest of you folks that are concerned with my eternal soul; shake the dust of your feet. You know what I’m talking about. Oh yes and please mind your own goddamned business. Oh and just so you’ll know how I feel when you proselytize ad nauseum. Why did Jesus die on the cross? He forgot his safe-word. Now piss off.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:02 pmBTW, the courts have never taken away ANYONE’s right to get married, they have ONLY denied same sex marriage.
Again, I WILL support fully, a same sex union with all the same rights/privs/and problems that a marriage allows.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:02 pm#155, Trit,
It is not unreasonable for individuals to feel that the institution of marriage only applies between one man and one woman of a certain age and mental capacity. Gay marriage is NOT obviously covered by our current laws, and should be handled legislatively.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:03 pmLast call….All aboard for Jesus flight 152 from blogosphere to heaven….last call.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:03 pmWould you be ready to leave with Jesus? First a few questions;are we going out to a decent place or Arby’s? Do I get to choose what I want from the desert tray? Movie or show after? Do I have to put out for a 2nd date?
October 25th, 2006 at 5:03 pm#158 And they get the same benefit? The government just won’t call it a marriage? That works for me. I got married in the Chapel of Happiness in San Diego for $23. I’ve been married for 19 years. I don’t give a fig about what the government calls it or thinks of it.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:04 pmGrand+Moff+Texan, God used Paul to record his standards and laws. Get it right now.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:06 pmDaryll
I agree Jesus is “the word” - for believers. Do believers need a SECULAR law against gay marriage or homosexual behavior in order to follow this word as it is given to them? Do we enact secular laws which require worship of God, not taking God’s name in vain, or tithing - all of which are Biblical commandments? What is the purpose of a secular law denying marriage rights to homosexuals if not to oppress an “outcast group”? Is this what Jesus called for or did he insist that we fight against oppression.
If you want to lovingly try to persuade homosexuals to give up their natural sexuality and their life style, you can (good luck on that BTW) but you have no right, secularly or spiritually, to do so.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:06 pmIt is not unreasonable for individuals to feel that the institution of marriage only applies between one man and one woman of a certain age and mental capacity.
Yes, and other people must be forced to live according to their superstitions.
Whoops! No, waitaminute. I was thinking of Afghanistan. That’s where they think like that.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:06 pm.
Grand+Moff+Texan, God used Paul to record his standards and laws.
Right, because Christ made such a hash of it? Call your self a Paulist, or better yet a Saulist. You’re no Christian.
Paul also told women to shut up in church. Try that some time.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:07 pm.
Daryll I will no longer comment on your stupidity.
Yes you are a bigot, and you completly ignored my questions. Oh and the religion crap is stupid. I am an atheist, and do not believe in Heaven and Hell. I believe in SCIENCE and real explanations to why we exist in this world. Jesus was a great man and did many wonderful things, but it is a stretch to think he was divine. If you love homosexuals so much, then why do you hate them so much. A few lines in a book is not enough proof for me to hate a group of people. And oh by the way, DIVORCE is considered a cardinal sin in your religion. So should we eliminate divorce too? Oh yeah and isn’t eating pork against the bible? So anyone who likes bacon should be jailed? You have no point and never will. Gay Marriage will be passed in the next decade and if you do not like it leave!
October 25th, 2006 at 5:08 pmwhy cant the gays just go back in the closet
forcing there lifestyle on everyone is wrong.
its bull shit that i have to explain to my kid why billy is kissing johnny.
its deviant , and used to be considered a mental disorder…
it still should be
there is a reason why 2 sexes exists, wtf is wrong with you people who want homsexual relations to be consided equivalent and as moral as heterosexual marriage.?!
October 25th, 2006 at 5:09 pmtrueblue, Jesus never condoned homosexual love. It’s proven in the Old and New Testament.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:09 pmConservatives will stack the courts and keep a lid on judicial activism
That’s funny, the conservatives on SCOTUS are the ones who vote against Congress most of the time.
“Judicial activism” is a conservative method. Of course, that’s in the real world, something conservative cattle know nothing about.
Aren’t they CUTE!
October 25th, 2006 at 5:10 pm.
I’m very angry, and know Jesus is as well.
–Daryll,or hisother brother daryll
So you KNOW jebus is angry,huh?
Prove it!!
I want to see your proof you hypocritical lying asshat.
Back up your assinine statement with proof jebus boy.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:11 pmwhy cant the gays just go back in the closet !!!!
forcing there lifestyle on everyone is wrong.
its bull shit that i have to explain to my kid why billy is kissing johnny.
its deviant , and used to be considered a mental disorder…
it still should be
there is a reason why 2 sexes exists, wtf is wrong with you people who want homsexual relations to be consided equivalent and as moral as heterosexual marriage.?!
October 25th, 2006 at 5:11 pmThis is not good timing for menendez - having a court throw gay marriage into the face of the conservative base 2 weeks before the election is going to get that more conservative voters out than otherwise. Nice.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:11 pmStill, NO ONE has ever given me a purely secular reason for denying marriage rights to homosexuals.
Regarding civil unions, I would whole-heartedly support this as the option for homosexuals IF it was the only LEGAL option for heterosexuals as well. “Marriage” can be defined as a SACRED union of one man and one woman as long as there are absolutely no legal, secular consequences, positive or negative. All or nothing.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:12 pmDouglas You really care about the “wording” of gay marriage?
My god you must have a pretty dull life to oppose gay “marriage” but support “civil unions”. Thier words dummy so get over it and live your life…
October 25th, 2006 at 5:13 pmNewProg, Again, I hate no one. Your life is under conviction because I was able to biblically prove that homosexuality is wrong. How can you call yourself a Christian and condone an act that is condemned biblically? You’re not a Christian, tell the truth. Have you followed Acts 2:38?
October 25th, 2006 at 5:13 pmDoes this crazy phouc even pay attention to what he writes.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:14 pm[…] Update: Just because it’s interesting, here are President Bush’s words on the subject in 2004 at the height of the debate over gay marriage (from Think Progress): I don’t think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that’s what a state chooses to do so. … I strongly believe that marriage ought to be defined as between a union between a man and a woman. Now, having said that, states ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others. […]
October 25th, 2006 at 5:15 pm“Why did Jesus die on the cross? He forgot his safe-word.” HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Oh that’s a good one. Wait till i tell my S&M friends that one. HAHAHAHAHA
“If Jesus came back at this moment”…. I’d literally crap my pants! Seriously though, I’m very sure that the man called Jesus is just a bunch of bones or possible just dust blowing in the wind. Some of him would have been eating by maggots or other creaters that feast on the dead. They, in turn would have been eaten and then, possibly, they would have parts of Jesus that didn’t get broken down and then just got expelled in poop or urine. It’s the whole circle of life thing. Consider Daryll that all material on earth and indeed the universe was once tiny particles condensed in a very small space after the Big Bang. Prior the the Big Bang, no one has any clear idea as not one shred of evidence points to a time before it.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:16 pmSo, I take it you always have gays hitting on you? Stop hanging out in gay bars and dressing like a metrosexual and that will stop. Stop drinking strawberry daquries. Stop talking with a lisp. Stop acting gay and you won’t be mistaken for being gay.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:17 pmbecause I was able to biblically prove that homosexuality is wrong.
October 25th, 2006 at 5:18 pmWhy aren’t you killing them all?
You aren’t following Leviticus if you’re not killing them!
Why do you defy God’s will and not kill them?
NewProg, neither are you for condoning these acts, have you followed Acts 2:38. If not, then you haven’t even began the christianity faith. Do you drink hard drink (liquor), do you commit fornication/masterbation, do you use the lords name in vain?
October 25th, 2006 at 5:18 pmAgain, Daryll, I want your proof that Jesus is angry with this court ruling.
Proof, not you setting yourself up as prophet.
You said you KNOW Jesus is angry, now prove it or state that you do NOT KNOW and you were lying.
Back up your statement. Prophet Boy
October 25th, 2006 at 5:21 pmDaryll I am not Christian
I am a humanist who believes in love, compassion and respect for everyone. I could care less what the bible says about homosexuals. Furthermore you ignored my questions from before. If you had a close relative(maybe even an offspring) who was homosexual would you continue this rhetoric. I pray(no pun intended) you wouldn’t as it could lead to your child’s suicide. Don’t you realize the sadness you bring to others? Is that Christian? When will you learn to honor people for who they are instead of the sexual partners they have. If the bible is so hateful towards gays then it is not a book to be respected…
October 25th, 2006 at 5:22 pmbTrue -
October 25th, 2006 at 5:23 pmI looked up the curriculum requirements for Daryll’s CS degree, a whole 33 computer related credits needed, of which six courses are required and five electives.
There are plenty of community colleges with more rigorous standards than that!