First gay couple legally marries in Iowa.
By on Aug 31st, 2007 at 1:02 pm
First gay couple legally marries in Iowa.
This morning, a minister married two men, “sealing the state’s first legal same-sex wedding. Less than 24 hours earlier, a judge had thrown out Iowa’s ban on gay marriage.”
UPDATE: Polk County officials won a stay of a judge’s order today, halting pending marriage applications.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
This is a plot by Karl Rove to get the “values voters” riled up!
Just you wait and see.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:04 pmAbout time TP!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:04 pmStill no Clinton donor story??? What’s up with TP?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:06 pmBias reporting?
Bob, are you getting warm and tingly thinking about those naughty, naughty gay couples?
I betcha wanna run to the nearest restroom and work out some anti-gay feelings.
Come on, you know it is true.
-GSD
August 31st, 2007 at 1:10 pmAwesome! Inshallah this will pull all the bigots and trolls out of the other threads so we can have sensible discussions about issues that actually matter!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:10 pmPaging Daryll to the gay couple married in Iowa thread…paging Daryll to the gay couple married in Iowa thread…
August 31st, 2007 at 1:11 pmBobbie has been begging for a gay thread all morning. You can’t say TP isn’t responsive to its readers.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:12 pmCongratulations!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:13 pmWelcome to equality for everyone.
***sound of Bob sighing in relief***
August 31st, 2007 at 1:14 pmAnd I imagine life in Iowa for everybody else will pretty much go on the same way it always has. And no heterosexual marriages will be destroyed.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:15 pmThey’ll be divorced within 3 years
August 31st, 2007 at 1:15 pmWar in Irag going on and I imagine life in Iowa pretty much goes on.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:17 pmI thought the Eighth Amendment prohibited Gay Marriage.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:17 pmWhat I find interesting is that very few trolls will actually say “they have a problem with gays” and most usually say the opposite.
So, what I want to know is, where do all the people come from that vote to ban gay marriage?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:17 pmLess than 24 hours earlier, a judge had thrown out Iowa’s ban on gay marriage.â€
———————————————————–
Can’t let the people decide about this things when we have really smart judges decide for us.
I suppose this is how everything would be decided if Leftists had their way.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:17 pm#
They’ll be divorced within 3 years
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 31, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
#
Like so many hetero couples
August 31st, 2007 at 1:18 pmBingo #12
August 31st, 2007 at 1:18 pm“…paging Daryll to the gay couple married in Iowa thread…”
I believe he’s on his way, he ought to be going through Peoria anytime now.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:18 pmThey’ll be divorced within 3 years
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 31, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
Is that the average duration for a marriage?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:18 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey
He’s not off the oxygen since he fainted…
August 31st, 2007 at 1:18 pmIt’s a goddamn shame that Cynicon and Bob’s marriage is so affected by this.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:19 pmhe ought to be going through Peoria anytime now.
Comment by Raven — August 31, 2007 @ 1:18 pm
Yeah, but he has to stop and shoot some baby and grown up 25 lb deer. That’ll take him a little longer…
August 31st, 2007 at 1:20 pmThe irony of this is that Iowa passed a Defense of Marriage Act in 1998. The court’s ruling of this being unconstitutional is what gave this window of opportunity for gays to marry in Iowa. If the wingnuts had just left well enough alone, this couple would not have been getting married.
Hope all other gay-hating states are paying attention…
August 31st, 2007 at 1:22 pmMarriage is a joke to LIbs.
60’s & 70’s Remember their old line:
“We don’t need a piece of paper(marriage license) to declare our love”.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:22 pm“On Thursday, Polk County Judge Robert Hanson ruled that Iowa’s 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which allowed marriage only between a man and a woman, violated the constitutional rights of due process and equal protection of six gay couples who had sued.”
You will notice that there were two laws which this judge felt to be in contradiction of each other, and he decided in favor of the “superior” law.
The voter’s can vote that all cows should be green, and then also vote that all cows should be purple. Which law is right and who decides?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:22 pmDo married homos(exuals) commit adultery or is that too outdated?
Comment by Bob
You can ask Sen. Craig or Ted Haggard that question.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pmChew on this, homophobe Wingnuts:
So Repukes, how does excluding gays from marriage serve in the interest of government?
Hmmm????????????
August 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pmCan’t let the people decide about this things when we have really smart judges decide for us.
I suppose this is how everything would be decided if Leftists had their way.
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
Yes, it is. We like the Constitution, with its checks-and-balances and three-branch system. I’m sorry if you think it’s just a damn piece of paper.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pmWhat is “HT”?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:24 pmAwesome! Inshallah…
Comment by toasterhead
——————————————————–
Actually, if Allah had his way, the newlyweds would be forced to build a stone wall which would then be toppled over, crushing them to death…or perhaps they’d be tossed off a cliff.
Either way, Allah’s will is death.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:24 pmMarriage is a joke to LIbs.
Comment by Bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
Do we need to go through the litany of Republican adulteries again?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:24 pmThat’ll take him a little longer…
Comment by RUCerious
If he goes thru the Pennsy mountains, all he has to do is pick one up alongside the Interstate.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:24 pmRingo, have you been talking to Allah again?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:25 pmBob, please. You are an idiot.
Do everyone – including yourself – a favor and JUST. SHUT. UP.
Good grief. You really need to find a hobby or something.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:26 pmSo, what I want to know is, where do all the people come from that vote to ban gay marriage?
Comment by Egreggious
They come from places where marriage is considered a bond between a man and a woman. Pretty much everybody thinks this except the far left — which is why the only place where it is the law is where a judge or state supreme court (like here in MA) made the ruling by fiat.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:26 pmComment by Bob
Ladies and gentlemen, I present you with the DENSEST object in the universe, BOB!
Your question went over as if you stepped on a rake and smacked yourself in the face!!!!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pmIt seems to be Allah’s will that Bingo brings his butterknife sharp wit to this gunfight.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pmEither way, Allah’s will is death.
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:24 pm
Yeah. Yahweh was a mean bastard in the Old Testament, wasn’t he?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pmp.s. have you seen the divorce statistics in RED states…?
Just asking.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pm#26 Way To Go Mr P!
Bookmarked HeyooOOOoooOooooOOOOooOooO!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:27 pmEither way, Allah’s will is death.
Comment by Ringo
Just like the Christian god demands death to those who sleep witht he same sex. Or at least that’s what the right-wing nuts spew.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:28 pmThey come from places where marriage is considered a bond between a man and a woman.
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 31, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
Why do places like that exist?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:28 pm#26 Way To Go Mr P!
Bookmarked HeyooOOOoooOooooOOOOooOooO!
Comment by Bob
Hey look, it’s SCHIZOPHRENIA TIME!!!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:28 pmDo married homos commit adultery or is that too outdated?
Comment by Bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
I’ll ignore the slur and pretend you asked a serious question.
It’s possible that any married person, gay or straight, can commit adultery. And if the divorce courts across the land are any indication, it happens quite frequently (for straight people anyway — still too few married gay people getting divorced to get any kind of sample as to reason).
I would imagine that a gay married person is less likely to commit adultery than a straight married person, only because it’s still a great deal more difficult for gays to get married in this country than it is for straights. Only the deeply committed are going to have the strength for that fight. This doesn’t preclude any chance of adultery at all — it just makes it a bit less likely.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:29 pmDo married homos commit adultery or is that too outdated?
Comment by Bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
I believe it is quite common when the said “homo” is in a heterosexual marriage.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:29 pmInvite Mitt and Fred to the weddings. Senator Craig is busy right now but I know he sends his love. I’m proud that this is happening it’s like the Civil Rights days when Americans were told they were equal. I wish all of the couples the best. We still have some sickos out there but this is the right thing to do.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:29 pmONE MORE TIME, for you ultra-dipsh*ts. ANSWER THE F*CKING QUESTION.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:30 pm
“How does excluding gays from marriage serve in the interest of government?”
August 31st, 2007 at 1:31 pmDo everyone – including yourself – a favor and JUST. SHUT. UP.
Good grief. You really need to find a hobby or something
August 31st, 2007 at 1:32 pm—————————————————————————-
This is still America sweet lefty annie
unless TP decides otherwise It is their blog not yours commrade:)
Bookmarked HeyooOOOoooOooooOOOOooOooO!
Comment by Bob
Isn’t that Mr. PeePee’s line? Dang. You are one weird dude…Mr.P-Bob.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:32 pmThe interests of the American people = the interests of the American government.
Comment by Mr P
How does that invoke excluding gays from marriage? Because homophobes think so?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:33 pmJust like the Christian god demands death to those who sleep witht he same sex. Or at least that’s what the right-wing nuts spew.
Comment by dlet
———————————————————————
Where did Jesus say that homosexuals should be put to death?…Can you provide an example of any Christian (Phelps and his 45 followers aside) who calls for the death of homosexuals.
Don’t make equivocations where none exist.
In Iran and Saudi Arabia, homosexuals are put to death today, with the sanction of the government.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:33 pmThey’ll be divorced within 3 years
Comment by Cynicon Implant — August 31, 2007 @ 1:15 pm
So they’re republicans?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:34 pmMr P – “Because homophobes think so”
August 31st, 2007 at 1:34 pmThe interests of the American people = the interests of the American government.
Comment by Mr P
So we should be leaving Iraq? Agreed.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:34 pmComment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
I re-read my post three times and I can’t seem to find a reference to Jesus anywhere in it. Can you point it out to me?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:35 pmIn Iran and Saudi Arabia, homosexuals are put to death today, with the sanction of the government.
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Which is a perfect example of why religion and state should not mix!!!!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:35 pmSo we should be leaving Iraq? Agreed.
Comment by dlet
“Debating” with the trolling schizoid is like shooting a fish in a barrel that’s eating itself.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pmSo Repukes, how does excluding gays from marriage serve in the interest of government?
Hmmm????????????
Comment by RepublicansAreFascists — August 31, 2007 @ 1:23 pm
I’ll take a stab at it using logic presented to me in a debate with a family member yesterday on this subject (gay marriage):
Since gay couples can not procreate then they essentially reduce the tax payer rolls, therefore the government loses tax dollars by not only giving them the same tax benefit as married couples but also due to the fact that they do not produce another person that will be paying taxes.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pmRepublicansAreFascists sez:
Save your breath…er…fingers, RAF. The pathetic pissant trolls we get nowadays wouldn’t dare attempt to answer your question. They’d rather drink battery acid than get suckered into a rational debate…after all, in such a setting, they’re completely unarmed. ^_^
August 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pmHEyOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooOOOOOooOOOooOOOoo!!!!
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
You really must explain this sometime. Is it a rebuttal to something? Is it some bizarre point worthy of debate? Is it your cat walking across your computer keyboard? What?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pmPoor Mister Urine, he keeps forgetting to change his user ID and outs himself as Bob, while talking to Bob, or is it Mr Urine? He’s so confusedooOOOOOOOooooooo
August 31st, 2007 at 1:36 pmthen the laws need to reflect that belief.
Comment by Mr P
RIGHT, you just can’t handle the fact that “the times, they are a-chaingin’ “.
Now pucker up loverboy!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:37 pmIf the majority of Americans (or people in a community) share a certain belief, then the laws need to reflect that belief.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
I sure wished people believed church and state should be separate.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:37 pmI never read the bible but doesn’t the christian god also advocate death for those wearing coton with leather, too? Think I haerd that before.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:37 pmSince gay couples can not procreate then they essentially reduce the tax payer rolls, therefore the government loses tax dollars by not only giving them the same tax benefit as married couples but also due to the fact that they do not produce another person that will be paying taxes.
Comment by hacker bob
But what if they adopt some snowflakes?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:38 pmhacker Bob your logic sucks
August 31st, 2007 at 1:38 pmYup. They are commonly beheaded.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
It shows the utter sickness of religion being given the power of coercion through the state.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:38 pmComment by hacker bob
Another fish…
Gay couples reduce the tax base????????????
**NEWSFLASH**
“Ahem, they’re already adopting!”
Next strawman please.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:39 pmIf the majority of Americans (or people in a community) share a certain belief, then the laws need to reflect that belief.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
okay so let me get this straight. If the majority of the people in a community think all non-whites should move to a different community, the law should reflect this?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:39 pmSince gay couples can not procreate then they essentially reduce the tax payer rolls, therefore the government loses tax dollars by not only giving them the same tax benefit as married couples but also due to the fact that they do not produce another person that will be paying taxes.
Comment by hacker bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
Following this logic, hetersexual couples should only be permitted to marry if they are both able to procreate, and if a year passes with no issue, the marriage should be declared null and void (since they are selfishly enjoying a tax benefit without producing another potential tax payer to offset it). Gotta keep that tax revenue up, you know.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:40 pmIt’s called a troll mating dance; leading to mutual or self masterbation.
Comment by ∞Ω
I think missmolly has her answer for what the “HeyooooOOOooOOO” is.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:40 pmLadies and gentlemen, I present you with the DENSEST object in the universe, BOB!
Your question went over as if you stepped on a rake and smacked yourself in the face!!!!
Comment by RepublicansAreFascists — August 31, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
sorry, that prize has to be shared among the sockpuppets p, Wrongo, Boob and Dog. it’s a tie.
And for the aforementioned, the American government, as it stands now, no longer represents the American people. it represents and supports Al Qaeda.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:40 pmBut what if they adopt some snowflakes?
Comment by dlet — August 31, 2007 @ 1:38 pm
That is the same brick wall I steered them into. My words were “What about adoption?” The response was a “My Pet Goat” stare.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:41 pmI know I’m right.
Comment by Mr P
And therefore the judge changed the ruling, reflecting THE NEW times we live in.
Don’t like it? You could just kill yourself! :-|
August 31st, 2007 at 1:41 pmCan you point it out to me?
Comment by dlet
good one.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:41 pmI know I’m right.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
all you 4-year-olds say that.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:41 pmI know I’m right.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Christ, you’re lame!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:42 pmMary Cheney didn’t adopt.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:42 pmJingo sez:
Nice attempt to move the goalposts, Jingo, but dlet’s actual words were “Just like the Christian god demands death to those who sleep with he same sex. Or at least that’s what the right-wing nuts spew.”.
But if you really want an example, here it is:
(Note: this is from the New Testament. )
August 31st, 2007 at 1:42 pmThe response was a “My Pet Goat†stare.
Comment by hacker bob
Oh, concern for children…
August 31st, 2007 at 1:43 pmIf the majority of Americans (or people in a community) share a certain belief, then the laws need to reflect that belief.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
Not in this country. Try North Korea, they think like that there. They’ll welcome you.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:43 pmMary Cheney didn’t adopt.
Comment by Egreggious
Oh hacker bub, where for art thou?
What brick wall?
Your argument holds NO WATER.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:44 pmIt’s called Democracy, my Leftist “friend,†study up!!!
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Is that a yes or a no?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:44 pmhomos in Iowa.
Comment by Mr P
Jesus still loves you, homophobe.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:44 pmComment by Bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:38 pm
Comment by RepublicansAreFascists — August 31, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Comment by missmolly — August 31, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
Read the start of my post again:
I’ll take a stab at it using logic presented to me in a debate with a family member yesterday on this subject (gay marriage):
August 31st, 2007 at 1:44 pmI re-read my post three times and I can’t seem to find a reference to Jesus anywhere in it. Can you point it out to me?
Comment by dlet
—————————————–
Sure…You referred to the Christian God. Please note that the word Christian begins with the prefix: Christ. Christ is another name for Jesus.
The Christian God, Christ, is Jesus.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:45 pmI sit corrected, hacker bob.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:46 pmIf the majority of Americans (or people in a community) share a certain belief, then the laws need to reflect that belief.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
Thanks Mr. P. I guess its time we left Iraq now, right?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:46 pmAnd the local community. I live in Virginia, I’m not too worried about homos in Iowa.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
Ah, Virginia, home of married cousins. Now it’s clear what’s wrong with pee, besides the stench.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:46 pmThat is the same brick wall I steered them into. My words were “What about adoption?†The response was a “My Pet Goat†stare.
Comment by hacker bob
Um, yeah. That was my other point. If they adopt they are rasing a tax payer. Just because the child didn’t come from their loins doesn’t mean they aren’t nurturing the next generation. They should benefit from that. After all the tax breaks are for the care of the child. Anyway, please prvide information that all heterosexual married couples that enjoy tax breaks actually are able to and do have children and then maybe you can use your logic in an argument. Otherwise it is a non-starter.
ps. I think that blank stare you saw was them thinking they can’t believe they are related to you.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:46 pmThe Christian God, Christ, is Jesus.
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
Not the same God as the one in the Old Testament?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:47 pmIf the majority of Americans (or people in a community) share a certain belief, then the laws need to reflect that belief.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:35 pm
Not in this country. Try North Korea, they think like that there. They’ll welcome you.
Comment by ronjazz
————————————————————————–
North Korea is a Communist police state run by one man. The people have no say in anything.
You are an idiot.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:47 pmDid you see that you are featured in my new blog?!?!
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
No, and neither has anyone else.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:47 pmI’m not too worried about homos in Iowa.
Comment by Mr P
Just the Mexicans, right boy?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:47 pmJingo sez:
Then who exactly is Jesus praying to in all those pictures? Who was that ‘Father’ person he kept referencing?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pmI’m not too worried about homos in Iowa.
Comment by Mr P
But what if they start messing with your corn flakes?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pmYou know how you hate cream of wheat…
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
Nice try..but no. If you believe that the Christian god and Jesus are the same you might want to speak with your preacher.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pmLay off hacker bob!
He’s relating what somebody said to him, not what he himself believes!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pmOh, concern for children…
Comment by Juan C — August 31, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
Blank and desperate
————————————————————————————
I sit corrected, hacker bob.
Comment by RepublicansAreFascists — August 31, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Thank you.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pmI don’t see why the Government has any say in Marriage. I don’t see why they provide a tax break to married persons, when Marriage is a church related issue.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:48 pmNorth Korea is a Communist police state run by one man. The people have no say in anything.
You are an idiot.
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Wrong again, Wrongo, they choose to follow him, because that’s their belief system. You’re the idiot.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:49 pmunless they are spreading AIDS.
Comment by Mr P
Oooh, this is getting good!
I think I’m learning how to play you like a $20 fiddle.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:50 pmThat’s him too.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007
An identity crisis nearly approaching yours, honey….
August 31st, 2007 at 1:50 pmNice try..but no. If you believe that the Christian god and Jesus are the same you might want to speak with your preacher.
Comment by dlet — August 31, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
Wrongo only seeks out his preacher when he’s horny.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:51 pmps. I think that blank stare you saw was them thinking they can’t believe they are related to you.
Comment by dlet — August 31, 2007 @ 1:46 pm
Actually, that was their follow up statement “I can not believe we are related.” And it came from somone that has ALWAYS voted (D). I am the black-sheep” (R) in the family.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:51 pmMr. Pee sez:
Sooo…..he’s praying to himself?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:52 pmLittle boy urine,
Don’t worry about AIDS.
First, you have to have some kind of sexual contact with ANOTHER person to get it!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:52 pm(Note: this is from the New Testament. )
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — August 31, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
And later drafts of the New Testament, as a matter of fact. According to Bart Ehrman, the references to homosexuality were inserted by scribes in the middle ages.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:52 pmA question for the homophobes.
Why does it matter if gays marry? How does this affect your lives?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:53 pm… unless you’re on the H-train.
Are you an intravenous user????
August 31st, 2007 at 1:53 pmEgg, thanks
August 31st, 2007 at 1:53 pmPersonally, why would the homosexuals want the same misery as the rest of us?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:54 pmI don’t see why they provide a tax break to married persons, when Marriage is a church related issue.
Comment by Tundra — August 31, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
Perhaps the concept of a civilized society could explain some of it. Marriage is a long-standing human custon,even among atheists. the spiritual aspect of it and the legal aspect of it are two entirely different things, and our Constitution very specifically keeps them seperate. If a church doesn’t want to marry two homosexuals, that’s fine, but the government has no standing to deny it. America has stood for freedom, and many Americans have fought and died for freedom, for everyone.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:55 pmI know I’m right.
Comment by Mr P
And the rest of us KNOW you’re an Idiot….
August 31st, 2007 at 1:55 pmChristians: “WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, WHAAAAAAAAAAAAA, but somebody wrote in the bible that homosexuality is wrong, WAAAAAAAAAA”
LOL
August 31st, 2007 at 1:56 pmThere are things that you amoral Leftists just can not understand, this is one of them.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
Explain it, then, Be specific.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:56 pmNot necessarily.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
But you know to soak your needles in bleach, don’t you?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:56 pmPersonally, why would the homosexuals want the same misery as the rest of us?
Comment by hacker bob
Are you in a miserable unfulfilling marriage hacker bob?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:57 pmmeth heads like p can’t afford needles. he’s more likely to get AIDS from his brother.
August 31st, 2007 at 1:57 pmAre you in a miserable unfulfilling marriage hacker bob?
Comment by dlet — August 31, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
It was a joke, son………
But have you priced a divorce lately? Cheaper to keep her!
August 31st, 2007 at 1:59 pmRead the start of my post again:
I’ll take a stab at it using logic presented to me in a debate with a family member yesterday on this subject (gay marriage):
Comment by hacker bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
I apologize if I appeared to think that you endorsed this “logic”– and I should have included the start of your post with the rest of it.
I am assuming that you responded to your family member by hitting their “logic” out of the park.
Sadly, there are those who truly believe that marriage is solely for procreation. They haven’t yet woken up to the reality that not all married people procreate, and not all people who procreate are married.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:01 pm“…you… just can not understand…”
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007
When someone is finally backed down into such a small corner of their awareness that they make this statement, they are playing their last card.
The next statement which often follows
August 31st, 2007 at 2:01 pm(be patient, Mr. P, it could be years out there in front of you)
is:
“You are all crazy, I’m the only one who’s sane anymore.”
Explain it, then, Be specific.
Comment by ronjazz — August 31, 2007 @ 1:56 pm
-
As a democrat (from Iowa) I’ll field the question. God, The Holy Spirit, and Christ are one and three.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:03 pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
wiki-”the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons: the Father, the Son (incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth), and the Holy Spirit.”
Poor daryll, ashamed to come on the site today and rant about how god’s plan for saving gays has been dealt a serious blow.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:05 pmNice try..but no. If you believe that the Christian god and Jesus are the same you might want to speak with your preacher.
Comment by dlet
————————————–
I don’t have a preacher, I was raised Catholic.
Catholics believe, as Mr.P stated, that God has three faces: Yahweh (also know as Jahovah), the Father and Creator of the universe, Christ (also known as Jesus), the Son who is Jahova born unto man. He is the redeemer of our sins and the founder of the Christian faith. Finally there is the Holly Ghost (or Holly Spirit), this face of God is the mystery of life and the represents all that we cannot know.
At least that’s how I learned it.
None of those three faces ever prescribed death as the penalty for homosexuality. In fact, homosexuality is rarely mentioned in the Bible other than the prohbition against two men laying down together in Laviticus.
I might add that nothing is mentioned about two women laying together.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:05 pmthe doctrine of the Trinity states that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons: the Father, the Son (incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth), and the Holy Spirit.â€
Comment by Erik
So then, if the Old testament god said that gays should be put to death then Jesus said it too.
Hey Ringo, you hear that you were wrong. According to the argument that you put out Jesus did say he hates gays.
Man, religion is screwier than Mr. Pee’s mind.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:06 pm#133 – “First, you have to have some kind of sexual contact with ANOTHER person to get it!” Comment by RepublicansAreFascists — August 31, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
“Not necessarily.” Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 1:53 pm
————————————————————
I have to agree with Mr. P. HIV can be passed from IV drug users sharing needles, the occasional organ transplant that isn’t properly checked, and countries that don’t sufficiently test the blood that is donated.
HIV, from a global perspective, is majority passed by heterosexual contact. In the US and Canada, it’s majority passed by male homosexuals, then heterosexuals, then IV drug users.
US infection rates from transfusions and transplants has reduced to almost nothing. The US has one of the best HIV/STD testing procedures of tissues/blood.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:07 pmJingo sez:
Apparently, you missed my post entirely, Jingo. I’ll repost the relevant Bible passage for your reference:
August 31st, 2007 at 2:08 pm
So then, if the Old testament god said that gays should be put to death then Jesus said it too.
Hey Ringo, you hear that you were wrong. According to the argument that you put out Jesus did say he hates gays.
Man, religion is screwier than Mr. Pee’s mind.
Comment by dlet — August 31, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
-
I would truly like to see the line in the bible where God says ANYONE should be put to death. please? Oh wait here it is :
August 31st, 2007 at 2:09 pm“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life”
this just in……………..
Warner will not run for re-election.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:09 pmAny homophobes still here can relax (for now):
“At 11 a.m., after about 20 gay couples had applied for marriage licenses, the Polk County recorder announced that she had been instructed to stop accepting their applications. ”
The county attorney’s office has stepped in with an appeal.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:10 pmWrong again, Wrongo, they choose to follow him, because that’s their belief system. You’re the idiot.
Comment by ronjazz
—————————————————————————–
You might want to read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Aquariums-Pyongyang-Years-North-Korean/dp/0465011047/ref=sr_1_8/102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1188583697&sr=1-8
…before you make such stupid remarks.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:10 pmErik sez:
Not entirely sure what your point is, Erik, but I can come up with a lot more Bible passages that call for people to be put to death, if you’re interested…
August 31st, 2007 at 2:11 pm“Wrong! You all only exist in my consciousness. If you are not perceived by me, you “are not†(you don’t exist).”
Comment by Mr P
Dang dude, you’re already there!
August 31st, 2007 at 2:11 pmAs a person living in Iowa, I just wanted everyone to know that the world has not come to an end and the break down of society as we know it has not happened. I am sure, that because a same sex marriage happened here today, we would know first.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:12 pmNot entirely sure what your point is, Erik, but I can come up with a lot more Bible passages that call for people to be put to death, if you’re interested…
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — August 31, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
-
woops meant to say “any christian.” point still stands. And saying that a homosexual cannot be a christian is ridiculous (pre-empted)
August 31st, 2007 at 2:13 pm…before you make such stupid remarks.
Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 2:10 pm
so basically, the North korean people cannot rise up and get rid of Kim? Why, because he uses the techniques that Bush is trying to bring here? Or because they have decided it’s easier to go along to get along? One would think that perhaps you might learn a lesson from this book yourself, but your blind loyalty and foolish cowardice will prevent that.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:14 pmAccording to Ringo, Jesus said all these things too. The Trinity…if one part says it they all say it…right Ringo?
Lev. 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:14 pmEx. 31:15 Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
Ex. 21:15 He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Ex. 21:17 He that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Ex. 22:19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.
Lev. 20:13 If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.
Lev. 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, the adulterer
and the adulteress shall be put to death.
Why does the Left hate so?
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
Your question is loaded and leading. There is no way to answer it.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:15 pmHowever, it appears it is you that is hating the equality which has been granted upon another group of Americans, so I guess I can ask you the same question.
As a person living in Iowa, I just wanted everyone to know that the world has not come to an end and the break down of society as we know it has not happened. I am sure, that because a same sex marriage happened here today, we would know first.
Comment by ProudIowaLib — August 31, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
You do realize that Iowa is not the first part of the world to accept same sex marriage? Check out Wiki
August 31st, 2007 at 2:15 pmBut have you priced a divorce lately? Cheaper to keep her!
Comment by hacker bob — August 31, 2007 @ 1:59 pm
“Nearly all U.S. research has found that married men are happier and live longer than never or previously married men (these results apply to men over 30).”
http://edp5285-01.sp01.fsu.edu/Guide4.html
I read one study that ranked happiness like this:
August 31st, 2007 at 2:16 pmHappiest- married men
then-single women
then-single men
Unhappiest- married women
then-
Is what upset God. Your post is beside the point.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
God sounds like a meth head according to p.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:16 pm#150 – “I might add that nothing is mentioned about two women laying together.” Comment by Ringo — August 31, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
A better check would be “how many times is it referenced as wrong or a sin in the Bible?”
Homosexuality = 3-7 (depends on which translation is used)
Adultery is mentioned 47 times, but does not seem to be any more important to modern-day “c”hristians than the very few references to homosexuality.
The condemnation of lying/liars occurs over 70 times (”liar” 21 times, “false witness” 19, “lying” lips/tongues 31 times). Still not much of an issue for modern-day “c”hristians.
Stealing is condemned 73+ times (”steal” 23 times, “thief/robber” 50+, except stealing for food: Proverbs 6:30 “Men do not despise a thief, if he steal to satisfy his soul when he is hungry.” [KJV]).
http://www.sigmalogobooks.com/SLB_Bible_Mistranslated.html
One can only assume that when modern-day “c”hristians ingore Biblical texts that occur in 2-5 times the rate as the ones that (supposedly) reference homosexuals, it’s NOT a ‘morals’ issue on which they make a stand. It’s the convenience that their prejudice and bias is being given a (very weak) foundation around which they flock.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:16 pm25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator…
…
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God…
This refers to the corporate militarists who run the country and pull Georges strings.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:17 pmBut in most cases (i.e. Catholics), it is true.
Comment by Mr P — August 31, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
-
Im not talking about a specific denomination. You dont have to be catholic to believe in God. Not to mention the obvious point about catholic priests.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:18 pmChurches that put anything before compassion infuriate me like not much else can. You really think that Christ, upon meeting a man in need of salvation would even consider his sexuality?
Comment by margaret — August 31, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
Thanks.
See, the survey says I am happy :-)
August 31st, 2007 at 2:18 pmThe concepts of marriage and monogamy no longer serve the same purpose that they used to in society anyway. They’ll continue to erode and there’s nothing that anyone can do to change it. The only valid purpose of marriage is tax benefits, otherwise there’s no need to have the state or a religion validate a couple’s love.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:19 pmSo Mr. P or Bob or whateve it is today – you too can still gain happiness! You just need to leave your computer once in awhile, be sweet with some poor unsuspecting females and one of them may find your redeeming quality. Everyone has at least one redeeming quality.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:20 pmIsn’t it great when a judge overrules the peoples decision! Personally, I don’t think we the people should have any say in anything. Just let the judges decide!
August 31st, 2007 at 2:20 pmPerhaps the concept of a civilized society could explain some of it. Marriage is a long-standing human custon,
That is the same argument that the “Wacko nut jobs that want to stop gay marriage” use though. Noone can explain the benefit that a couple provide to society that are married over a couple that have choosen to live together for 30 years.
even among atheists. the spiritual aspect of it and the legal aspect of it are two entirely different things, and our Constitution very specifically keeps them seperate.
Rewarding people who have choosen to get married over people who have choosen to remain single for life is not the governments job. It speciffically goes against every one is created equal. Equal if you decide to get married for any reason.
If a church doesn’t want to marry two homosexuals, that’s fine, but the government has no standing to deny it.
The only thing worse than the government passing laws to allow it is the government passing laws to deny it.
America has stood for freedom, and many Americans have fought and died for freedom, for everyone.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:20 pmAgreed and well known.
The county attorney’s office has stepped in with an appeal.
Comment by margaret — August 31, 2007 @ 2:10 pm
But was it in time to save the institution of marriage????
August 31st, 2007 at 2:20 pmMr. Pee sez:
*Sigh*. Since Jingo seems incapable of debating this issue with me, I guess I’ll indulge you, Mr. Pee.
It’s hardly ‘beside the point’. The passage states that homosexual behavior is a direct result of man turning away from God. Thus, anyone who is homosexual is automatically judged as having turned away from God. And since the punishment for this turning away is death, all homosexuals are deserving of death. Q.E.D..
It doesn’t matter if the homosexuality is the root cause, or merely a symptom of an alleged greater turning away from God…the result is the same. Homosexuals deserve death, according to the Bible.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:21 pm#179 – “Personally, I don’t think we the people should have any say in anything. Just let the judges decide!” Comment by Roger_Roger — August 31, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Based on your sarcastic remark, you suppor the US having a vote of if we should stay in Iraq, or “pull out now”. (No pun intended.)
Wow! How very . . . . progressive of you!
August 31st, 2007 at 2:22 pmYou do realize that Iowa is not the first part of the world to accept same sex marriage? Check out Wiki
Comment by yikes — August 31, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
Yes, I fully support same sex marriages and am aware it has happened before. I find it ridiculous that people are so divided about this. My response to ridiculous comments is sarcasm. I find it especially ridiculous for people to base hate speech and discrimination on religion.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:23 pm181
So do people who wear clothing of blended fibers. Better check the “Made in China” tag in your shirts ASAP.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:25 pm179 “Isn’t it great when a judge overrules the peoples decision!”
You mean like when judges ruled that denying people of different races the right to marry was against the 14th Amendment?
That’s mighty white of you.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:28 pmIsn’t it great when a judge overrules the peoples decision! Personally, I don’t think we the people should have any say in anything. Just let the judges decide!
Comment by Roger_Roger — August 31, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
TPers, are we supposed to debunk this foolishness every time it appears on this thread, or can we just ask the dude to read the damn thread?
August 31st, 2007 at 2:28 pm#182 – “Homosexuals deserve death, according to the Bible.” Comment by TripMaster Monkey — August 31, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
Your logic is sound. While, of course, disagreeing with the conclusion.
I would say that those that “claim” the Bible as their justification for an anti-homosexual stance, “Fine! Make the entire Bible the law of the land, and kill children that curse their parents, kill anyone wearing cloth made of two different fibers, outlaw pork and shellfish and make locusts a delicacy. Also, kill anyone who’s been divorced and remaried!”
That last on is a BIG stone to throw at the holier-than-thou “c”hristians! They hate it when you quote verses they have chosen to ignore!
August 31st, 2007 at 2:29 pmComment by ProudIowaLib — August 31, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
We’ll have none of your “sarcasm” here. However, hypocrisy and blantant falsification are always accepted.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:31 pmJust let the judges decide!
Comment by Roger_Roger — August 31, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Roger Squared actually seemed uncharacteristically sarcastic with that comment. I must have mis-interpreted his comment. Conservatives are usually screaming about activist judges!
August 31st, 2007 at 2:34 pm“Well, I’m off ”
“(Now, I’m really off …”
Comment by Mr. President — August 31, 2007 @ 2:24 pm
This has been well established.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:35 pm“Well, I’m off â€
“(Now, I’m really off …â€
Comment by Mr. President — August 31, 2007 @ 2:24 pm
Finally, something we can all agree on.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:37 pmIt’s important to show outrage over this latest attack on the stability of marriage. What next, judges allowing for black men to marry white women?
To the haters: These ‘activist judges’ that you are so fond of mocking exist to ensure that rights and freedoms continue to exist for all Americans. And just because your neighbors in small towns across this country don’t like gay marriage doesn’t mean that blatant bigotry should be supported by the government. Mob mentality does not make things right and just. When something obviously ignores the Constitution, on which this nation was founded, it is up to the judges, the interpreters of said document, to rectify the situation.
After all, 9/11 was a faith-based initiative. So, if you don’t mind, keeping religion out of government seems to be a pretty good idea to me.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:39 pmRaven, you should really check this out.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:42 pmYou do realize that Iowa is not the first part of the world to accept same sex marriage? Check out Wiki
Comment by yikes — August 31, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
Yes, I fully support same sex marriages and am aware it has happened before. I find it ridiculous that people are so divided about this. My response to ridiculous comments is sarcasm. I find it especially ridiculous for people to base hate speech and discrimination on religion.
Comment by ProudIowaLib — August 31, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
We are on the same page ProudIowaLib and congrates on your state joining the 21st century.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:45 pmComment by Egreggious — August 31, 2007
Thanks, I’ve book marked it, check it out later, in the middle of an adobe making operation…
August 31st, 2007 at 2:52 pmEgreggious – Loved your “Under God” post!
August 31st, 2007 at 2:54 pmThanks, margaret.
August 31st, 2007 at 3:01 pmGood timing, too, Egreggious!
August 31st, 2007 at 3:21 pmAnd if Senator Larry Craig had been allowed to come out years ago, then he might marry another guy in Iowa today too.
August 31st, 2007 at 3:40 pmJust read that Iowa is now blocking same sex marriage. The judge who threw out the ban on same sex marriage just put a stay on same sex marriage at the request of Polk County officials. The stay will hold until the appeal is heard (and ruled on).
August 31st, 2007 at 3:42 pmChrist does remark on the God endorsed view of human sexual expression. He notes that the Creator intended for a man and a woman to be one flesh, by quoting from the book of Genesis. Christ answers a question by recalling the Genesis account of the first human sexual relationship. This is in Matthew 19 for anyone who might be interested.
Many Christians consider this account in Genesis – the Creator brought the woman Eve to the man Adam and they were one flesh – to be the beginning of marriage. This marks the relationship as neither a religious or a government permitted relationship. Marriage is older than either religion or government.
God created marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman. That’s why a government, which allows two men to commit sexual perversion and call it a marriage, will never threaten marriage.
Everyone knows now, and will continue to know, that any same-same gender relation will never be a marriage, and anyone who tries to participate in this sort of relationship will have consigned themselves to a relationship inferior to a man-woman relationship.
My saying this doesn’t make it this way. This is an observation.
August 31st, 2007 at 4:09 pmCan someone give me a bit of help. I often hear that same sex unions pose some never defined threat to heterosexual unions. What exactly is the threat? Do these folks secretly think their spouses will leave them for a same sex partner if they were allowed to? I really don’t get this part at all. What the hell are they talking about?
August 31st, 2007 at 4:35 pmInferior to a man-woman relationship? You mean those in the 40-50% divorce rate group? Or are we talking more the kind that just cheat and the wife doesn’t find out? Or the ones that end in murder? Or..
If I’m gonna get hitched, I think I’d like to make sure it’s a gay marriage. These man-woman relationships, ordained by God, seem to be a violent mess. Regardless, I’m glad that you admit to the crux of all of this, the solution to all problems: If God created marriage and that government cannot threaten it, then take away *ALL* legal recognition of marriage. After all, you don’t need protections, extra rights, lower taxes, et al, if you’re doing God’s holy work.
August 31st, 2007 at 4:39 pmThis is really good news for conservatives. Now they can stop looking for love in all the airport stalls, divorce their beards and settle into a true and loving relationship. It brings a tear to my eye. Poor Republicans, they are free now.
August 31st, 2007 at 4:46 pmInferior in the same way that a child in a single parent household knows he’s missing something by not having a mother and father. It’s not quite right. The child is not inferior but may have feelings of inferiority because he doesn’t have the ideal situation – a mother and a father.
Many Christians, I would be one of them, believe that God invited people to participate in creation when he commanded in Genesis 1:28 to be fruitful and multiply. To make this happen God gave people sexuality and desire.
As long as there is the God ordained relationship – man and woman in a marriage – there will be those who attack this relationship.
So, from where do the attacks on marriage come? unfaithfulness, and perversion, pornography, …
These attacks will also include what you hint: homosexual marriage is as good as heterosexual marriage. This will never be true because homosexuals can not be married.
I believe God’s intention in this area will always supercede any human intention.
August 31st, 2007 at 5:01 pmThese attacks will also include what you hint: homosexual marriage is as good as heterosexual marriage. This will never be true because homosexuals can not be married.
Comment by bitblt — August 31, 2007 @ 5:01 pm
Apparently the can. Nobody cares about comparing which is better but instead allowing individuals chose what is best for them. To the best of my knowledge your story also implies the subservent role of the female creation. Do you buy into that as well?
August 31st, 2007 at 5:07 pmMassive typos but I think you get what I ment.
August 31st, 2007 at 5:25 pmACT Fined $775,000
The Federal Election Commission yesterday issued the latest in a string of six-figure fines against partisan political groups — this time, against America Coming Together, a group financed by George Soros and labor organizations that sunk more than $100 million into campaign activities intended to help Democrats in the 2004 elections.
The decision to fine the group $775,000, the FEC’s third-largest penalty in its three-decade history, was intended to send a stern message to independent groups. The FEC has said it will crack down on groups that raise unlimited resources outside of the campaign finance system but then spend that money on activities aimed at influencing specific elections
September 1st, 2007 at 1:15 am.
cindy, suck me good; will you?
September 1st, 2007 at 2:14 ami know you right wing whores like delicious schlong.
We’re going about this in the wrong way. Those opposed to same-sex couples gaining marital rights in any form claim that marriage is between one man and one woman for the sole purpose of procreation and the raising of offspring. Further, they claim that marriage in any other form is threatening to such man-woman marriages.
So, let us set about to enforce these standards, by introducing legislation and ballot initiatives that include the following:
If passed by a simple majority –
1) The purpose of marriage is more defined as being solely for procreation and the raising of offspring.
2) Any man or woman who enters into a marriage with the knowledge of inability to produce offspring or the intent to not produce offspring shall be guilty of defrauding the State and making a false official statement of a willingness and ability to comply with part one.
3) Any marriage that fails to produce offspring naturally (without medical assistance) shall be voided, and the couple shall be liable for any financial or tax discounts received while married. Couples within a marriage may not adopt the offspring of others until they meet the natural conception and birth requirements. In the event that all natural offspring of the couple are deceased or otherwise not living within the household (by choice or by legal decree), the marriage shall be voided if the couple fails to produce other offspring within two years following the date the last offspring lived in the household. This includes any children who have reached their majority, whether living in the household or not.
4) Any persons who have had their marriages voided may not remarry.
5) Divorces are no longer recognized, save for the voiding of a marriage due to inability or unwillingness to produce offspring.
6) Adultery shall now be defined as a serious crime against the State, and shall be punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both.
7) Marriages performed outside of the jurisdiction shall not be valid nor recognized unless all the above requirements are met.
Should the measure not pass –
Marriages between any two competent and consenting individuals who have reached the age of majority shall be permitted and recognized, and all rights, responsibilities, and obligations shall be applied equally, regardless of the jurisdiction in which said marriage occurred.
Pretty simple. It is time for the “moral values” bunch to put up or shut up. Either you accept your own rhetoric regarding your claims of the purposes and sanctity of marriage, or you get off your high horse and grant all law abiding citizens in this nation to be treated equally under the law.
September 1st, 2007 at 2:28 amRingo, you idiots have been thoroughly shot down.. I love watching you and your biblehumping ilk trying to distance yourself from parts of that book which don’t specifically quote jesus or , better yet, dont quote “god.”
Hahahahaah. The bible is an all or nothing proposition bro, either its the word of god or it isnt, you cant pick and choose what fits your worldview and ignore the rest.. you can.. but you;d be an enormous hipocrite.. then again, this doesnt seem to be something thats problematic for you…so.. nevermind I guess.. hahaha.
>“…paging Daryll to the gay couple married in Iowa thread…â€
he’s been “delayed” at the airport…
> The interests of the American people = the interests of the
>American government. Comment by Mr P
Your idiocy truly is unceasing. If this were true, no law would ever be found unconstitutional, and there would be no point for the judicial branch to exist. Talk to the lawyer who was your public defender on that indecent exposure charge you got probation for last year… If the law in question does not relate to a fundamental right, it need only be rationally related to a legitimate government interest. Laws are essentially the will, or interest of the people, since they are enacted by legislators chosen by the people. So by your logic, A law is consitutional if it bears a rational relationship to the will of the majority. But thats not the standard, because presumably, if the law didnt bear a rational relationship to the will of the people, it never would have been enacted. So by your assanine “government=the people”
September 1st, 2007 at 3:32 amargument, all laws are inherently constitutional. Hahahahah. You crack me up….. this one is even better than your “supporting the president is the same thing as supporting the constitution” argument… hahah dude your never going to pass Civics 101 if you keep up like this..
CHRIST NEVER EXISTED, ALL RELIGION IS A LIE, AND KILL ALL THE REPUBLICANS.
September 1st, 2007 at 1:04 pmhttp://WWW.ZEITGEISTMOVIE.COM
The only BIBLE that is expressly ONLY JESUS quotes is the Jeffersonian Bible.
September 1st, 2007 at 1:06 pmhttp://www25.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/thomasjefferson.html
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/161/story_16121_1.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible
http://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Bible-Thomas/dp/0807077143