u 9 hr Jim49418 v Neither Why should conservatives change their values and support these things that they dont believe in? Just to gain a few votes? I dont think so. We've already seen the damage the liberals have done to society since they took control back in 2006. Conservatives should not back down on their morals like the liberals have done. Just look at the mess these liberals have already caused. Conservatives are our only hope out of this mess. Post
u Tue grethomory v Gay Marriage They might as well because it's coming sooner or later. This is not about being a Christian either...hell, atheists can marry and they don't believe in God. As Dolly Parton said, gays have the same right to be just as miserable as the rest of us. Post
u Tue jerbear v Civil Unions I would be against the gay marriage aspect, but in the case of two people like a brother living with say his sister or brother to help then if they were ill or disabled or even two friends trying to make it by moving in together. Why not allow them help each other? Post
u Jun 16 memyself v Civil Unions I believe in the biblical definition of marriage between a man and a woman. but if a civil union would give property and legal rights to people who live together than I am for it. But I am not for calling it" marriage" between the same sex,the Bible is totally against that. Post
u 9 hr Jim49418 v Neither Why should conservatives change their values and support these things that they dont believe in? Just to gain a few votes? I dont think so. We've already seen the damage the liberals have done to society since they took control back in 2006. Conservatives should not back down on their morals like the liberals have done. Just look at the mess these liberals have already caused. Conservatives are our only hope out of this mess. Post
u Wed williamd and don't use the excuse of , well, we didn't approve of interracil marriages either, at least those were a woman and a man . not two men or two women. @williamd Post
17 hr cubeshaker Morals are a judgement, change from person to person As far as "godly", we are not a theocracy so it is irreleveant rather you deem it "ungodly" or not Unclean? A) is that all marriage is to you ... an act of sex? You do realize that the same "sexual practice" you allude to (anal) is practiced by many hetero couples... so should they be denied? B) Assuming you are married, do you cheat?.. do you step out and have sex with someone other than your spouse? What makes you think a member of a ssm would?. If they do not sleep around, then the spread of diseases will lessen thus doing away with your "unclean" objection @cubeshaker Post
17 hr cubeshaker @williamd Wow someone paid attention in sex ed class... To bad they didnt pay as much attention in civics class. If you did you would realize that the loving decision was based on the 14th equal protection clause. Basically finding the state could not tell their citizens whom they could choose to marry. To do so they (the state) would have to show overwhelming states interest in order to deny the marriage. Now what overwhelming state interest is there in denying ssm? @cubeshaker Post
u 13 hr williamd cubeshaker, I think you misread my post .First off , I know Our Nation is not a Theocracy, I never said it was , nor did i refer that it should be .God has ordained the Marriage Institution to be between a Man and a Woman, and all society's have had that as their Main institution since the beginning. Granted , there has always been homosexuals and lesbians within most society's, but the majority of them have placed them in prison or destroyed them. because the punishment has been less in the modern world, doesn't mean that it is now ok or accepted .In america just a few decades ago , sodomy was against the law. Society has changed because of the breakdown in the Mor... @williamd Post
u Tue grethomory v Gay Marriage They might as well because it's coming sooner or later. This is not about being a Christian either...hell, atheists can marry and they don't believe in God. As Dolly Parton said, gays have the same right to be just as miserable as the rest of us. Post
u Tue jerbear v Civil Unions I would be against the gay marriage aspect, but in the case of two people like a brother living with say his sister or brother to help then if they were ill or disabled or even two friends trying to make it by moving in together. Why not allow them help each other? Post
u Jun 16 memyself v Civil Unions I believe in the biblical definition of marriage between a man and a woman. but if a civil union would give property and legal rights to people who live together than I am for it. But I am not for calling it" marriage" between the same sex,the Bible is totally against that. Post
Jun 14 Prime_Meridian v Gay Marriage If moralists can't get behind equal rights for everyone, they should at least have the common sense NOT to make their feelings be part of a political platform. It wasn't that long ago that a lot of people throughout the country felt as strongly about interracial marriages as many people feel now about gay marriage. Hell, in many states it was even unlawful. We need to stop attempting to legislate social conventions. Equal Protection Under the Law means exactly that. Post
u Jun 14 JHT v Civil Unions it seems to me that the biggest deal here is what WORD they choose to use.... I say let men & women keep it since they had it first, and then let the gays have civil unions. Who cares? REALLY ?? We're headed for financial collapse and you're worried about the NAME you get? wow. r1 reply Post
17 hr cubeshaker That (letting m/f have the word since they had it first) would be great... IF civil contracts offered the same rights and benefits across the board. But they don't... @cubeshaker Post
Jun 12 cubeshaker v Gay Marriage I love it when people say... well the homosexuals can get a civil union..... just not marriage. Now if these same people were forced to live with the MANY inequities of a c.u. vs marriage, they would cry foul. They would be the FIRST to say it was not fair. They would be the fist up in arms when they were denied the government benifits that are offered to married couples but denied to those with a c.u. But it is ok for the homosexuals to be treated like second class citizens... Post
Jun 12 razrbackrepub v Neither If we do that there won't be two parties anymore, just one republicrats!! Post
u Jun 11 rhanna1312 v Civil Unions Read the bible, marriage is a holy union between a man and woman. r1 reply Post
Jun 12 cubeshaker read the constitution.. . it shows that it doesn't matter what your bible says as we are not a theocracy. Marriage is not a "holy union'" it is a civil contract. If it was a "holy union" then athiest and agnostics could not marry... cant marry inot something that you are against.... Non judeo christians could not marry... @cubeshaker Post
Jun 10 Tryder v Gay Marriage The republican party should lead the way in getting government OUT of marriage all together. Post
Jun 10 MTR v Gay Marriage The times they are a changing. Always will. And adapting to reality is a way of not becoming extinct. Post
Jun 9 frigginhell v Gay Marriage Marriage is a contract for the division and sharing of property and nothing more. I'm not sure which is funnier. If they don't support it they lose votes because the majority of americans disagree and it makes them look like knuckle draggers. If they do support it the knuckle draggers that make up a large portion of their voting block will come out whining that the they've been betrayed and god will smite them. (sadly i'm sure the same aforementioned individuals will still vote repbulican because somehow rush will convince them it's a liberals fault. Post
u Jun 8 fscott777 v Civil Unions Civil unions and leave marriage as it was intended to be for one man and one woman. Post
u Jun 6 DegredWhiteGuy v Neither The Republican party should don black and tan uniforms and bomb and raid gay bars. Since that is how they want choice issues handled. They should go ahead and show themselves as the Reich. Post
Jun 6 Tejano1969 v Civil Unions It's not marriage so don't call it that.. Other than that, have at it. Just don't throw it up in our face! Post
Aug '12 wimada v Gay Marriage It time that everyone should be allowed to marry. I don't understand how this is still an issue. It is not a Christian issue because Jesus never talked about this issue, you would think that if it was really important, the son of God would say something. It will not lead to beastiality, because men are still human. It won't lead to pologymy, because gay marriage is still between two people that love each other. And if Republicans are so concerned with preserving the sanctity of marriage, they should work on outlawing divorce first. The Republicans are not on the right side of history for this issue. B7 e121 endorsed Post
Aug '12 DerivePI v Neither Leave this foolishness to the individual states. There is no constitutional power given to the Federal government to meddle in these affairs. B5 e81 endorsed Post
u Aug '12 POLYMATH257 v Civil Unions Let 'marriage' be for religious institutions and 'civil unions' be for governmental purposes. All current marriages should become civil unions. All property rights, all taxes, all survivorship rights should be associated with civil unions. What a religion wants to do for marriage is it's business, not the government's. B6 r5 replies e68 endorsed Post
Aug '12 jdpaul v Neither I do not support Gay Marriage or Gay Rights.. B3 r3 replies e48 endorsed Post
Aug '12 Coxygru v Gay Marriage Marriage: a constitutional right and a human right. Plain and simple. Read the documents. B2 r35 replies e39 endorsed Post
Aug '12 Wilberhum v Gay Marriage The concept of 'Group Superiority' needs to end. Every group should support equality for every other group. B1 r9 replies e12 endorsed Post
u Aug '12 ithink v Civil Unions Civil unions...for everyone. Marriage is a sacrament in many religions, our government isn't a religion. Our goverment, thru our courts, is responsible for regulating contracts. If two individuals want to enter into a civil union it should be a contract. Go to an attorney's office or down to the court house for the standard version, fill it in and register it. If after that you want to get married in a church, there will be a church 'out there' that will marry you. Let the chrurches deal with who should and who shouldn't. The government should only be concerned with the contract the two individuals entered into. B1 e11 endorsed Post
Aug '12 1adam2 v Neither the constitution is most specific, about making any law, written or oral for or against any religious belief. and that includes the religions, of that same old devil again. and let face it here, even most all civil unions today, are not holy. and gay marriage, most certainly not holy. and we do not need, to anger G-D more than HE already is at all of us. e11 endorsed Post
o Aug '12 JpMonty v Civil Unions Truly thinks government should stay out of the marriage business!!! B3 r2 replies e6 endorsed Post
Aug '12 Jcgiles v Neither It's a state issue at best. We shouldn't be changing the definition of something to appease 4% of the population. B1 r1 reply e7 endorsed Post