Why "protecting marriage" is retarded

what's retarded is to think they're worse than having no parents at all or having just one.

I think in some ways it's equivalent to having one parent. Maybe a tiny bit better, in that there may be more financial resources available. However, like a single-parent family, the gay family lacks individuals of both genders in caregiver roles for the child. This denies the child the opportunity to form relationships with both a mother and father.

But the proponents of gay marriage dismiss this concern out of hand, and insist that their notion of family is equal in all respects to a traditional family structure. Maybe they're right. I have my doubts because I think children probably do benefit from having close relationships with a mother and a father. However, what's undeniable is that this notion of gay families for childrearing is a relatively new societal development. It amounts to a grand experiment being conducted on a generation of children. In that respect it's similar to the grand experiment that has been under way with single-mother families.

I'm not persuaded that the societal embrace of single-mother families has been very good for society at all. I have similar doubts about this new move towards society endorsing gay families. That's why I will be voting in favor of prop 8 in California. I can support some kind of changes to the law to recognize homosexual couples, primarily in terms of inheritance law, visitation rights, etc. But I can't support the agenda of elevating the gay family as equal to a traditional family for the purposes of childrearing.
 
I think in some ways it's equivalent to having one parent. Maybe a tiny bit better, in that there may be more financial resources available. However, like a single-parent family, the gay family lacks individuals of both genders in caregiver roles for the child. This denies the child the opportunity to form relationships with both a mother and father.

But the proponents of gay marriage dismiss this concern out of hand, and insist that their notion of family is equal in all respects to a traditional family structure. Maybe they're right. I have my doubts because I think children probably do benefit from having close relationships with a mother and a father. However, what's undeniable is that this notion of gay families for childrearing is a relatively new societal development. It amounts to a grand experiment being conducted on a generation of children. In that respect it's similar to the grand experiment that has been under way with single-mother families.

I'm not persuaded that the societal embrace of single-mother families has been very good for society at all. I have similar doubts about this new move towards society endorsing gay families. That's why I will be voting in favor of prop 8 in California. I can support some kind of changes to the law to recognize homosexual couples, primarily in terms of inheritance law, visitation rights, etc. But I can't support the agenda of elevating the gay family as equal to a traditional family for the purposes of childrearing.

What individuals do in their bedrooms is no business of mine, but this is what I teach my children:

Broken/retarded humans make the best employees/civillians/serfs...

This minority lifestyle is Applied Eugenics: don't breed/die young/easier to control.

Created/promoted like any other policy agenda (look to compulsory public education).

Study it, you may see, or not:

Here are a few sources:

Dennis Altman's 'The Homosexualization of America': How the cultural elite "reinvent human nature, reinvent themselves."..."promiscuity and 'impersonal sex' are determined more by social possibilities than by inherent differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals, or even between men and women."

'After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 1990's', by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen: the blueprint activists used to implement this campaign using media and vast money to radicalize America-by processes known as desensitization, jamming and conversion.

Robert Jay Lifton's 'Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism': the Chinese are the original masters of desensitization, jamming and conversion, Kirk/Madsen mirror it almost word-for-word.

'Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far' by Charles W. Socarides, M.D.: interesting/logical Darwinian argument.

All hinges on this Rockefeller funded 'junk science' done by this freak pedophile named Kinsey:

Kinsey's Pedophiles: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2061305218446628970&hl=en

ps: Promoting single parent family is policy agenda as well.
 
That's exactly what courts are SUPPOSED to do , balance power. You're not against court decisions, you're against them when they're against you. What about when legislators passed a gay marriage bill and Arnold vetoed it? It's all about balance and checking!

How would you like it if people voted FOR gay marriage AND the courts confirmed it, AND the legislators approved it? You'd be crying tyranny, what matters to you is not the process, it's the result!

Josh, you are as impossible to have a conversation with on this subject, as it is to have with Christian evangelicals when I try to point out that our Constitution and freedom of religion should protect gay rights. I am not saying gay marriage should be illegal. I'm saying that the current trend to embrace it here is fascist in the opposite direction....have we learned nothing?

Under our Constitution I have no problem with gay marriage if it doesn't usurp religious freedom. Unfortunately what is being pushed right now does.

"Gays and atheists have suffered enough of Christian PC BS for 200 years, it's about time we get to say "if you don't like fag fitlhy California, GET THE FUCK OUT"

Wow, again, that is not what I believe or am saying. Little hostile aren't we? If the people of CA vote no, that is another matter. But the people didn't vote no in 2000. If the tide has turned, then yes for those living here as CA residents...that is their choice to leave. However, what about those of us who do not have a choice to leave? I still then have a problem with then being labeled a "hater" for following the Bible when teaching my children from it. Again, I teach them G-d says not to commit the act...along with a lot of other things we aren't supposed to do. I do not say G-d hates them, and definitely make it clear we are to love our fellow man. BTW, I do not have a choice currently to "get out" of CA if I were to be persecuted on this matter....my husband is fighting for your freedom of speech to hurl hostile words at me. If my husband has to serve to protect that freedom, then perhaps at least states that pass sweeping legislation to impose their view on the public could allow military members and their children to go by their home state rules....I simply will make sure our domicile is with a state that protects our freedom to teach (that doesn't necessarily mean it will be a state that trounces on gays freedom either).

"Don't blame God, just admit YOU (not you, but those who say God) hate gays, and there's nothing wrong with that, how cowardly for men to hide behind God to speak their own mine."

Hey, I didn't say G-d hated gays. He doesn't. I don't. I'm not saying there aren't Christians that do and spout off wrongly. Heck, I'm sure there are atheists, agnostics, and other religions that do. I'm sure in reverse there are gays who hate anyone that are not gay or do not wholly support and jump up and down for their cause. Please don't lump all that believe the Bible at it's word as people who hate gays. If we could come together on this issue more we could move ahead in on our country on other freedoms.

The Bible, G-d's Word, makes it clear that the act is not in his will. Never says he hates the person. BTW, I didn't write this....G-d did through Moses, so take it up with one of them.

Vayikra (Leviticus) 18:22 "You are not to go to bed with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination."

BTW, before that it goes into a lot of other things we are not to do...have sex with a close relative, your mother, your father, stepparents, siblings, grandchildren, neighbors wife, during time of niddah (menstruation...betting a lot of "Christians" don't follow that either),...etc. Verses 6-21 go into detail on all these things. Right after verse 22 it says not to have sexual relations with any animal and thus become unclean with it. It says in Vayikra (Leviticus) 18:29-30 "For those who engage in any of these disgusting practices, whoever they may be, will be cut off from their people. So keep my charge not to follow any of these abominable customs that others before you have followed and thus defile yourselves by doing them. I am Adonai your God."

Again, I didn't write the words, they are in the Bible, G-d gave them to Moses. Take it up with Him. It also says in Vayikra (Leviticus) 19:17-19 "Do not hate your brother in your heart, but rebuke your neighbor frankly, so that you won't carry sin because of him. Don't take vengeance on or bear a grudge against any of your people; rather, love your neighbor as yourself; I am Adonai. Observe my regulations".

This would mean that people who do hate those who are not following the words written in the Bible are also committing a sin. G-d despises the acts He has forbidden, not the people. King David committed adultery...G-d dealt with him for his sin...King David later repented, but there were still consequences. G-d didn't hate him....he loved him still. But never did G-d change His mind and teach what David did was okay, or now good to go...

I simply am arguing that CA is making this a no-win situation right now. Those on the so-called left are hostile that gay marriage is not accepted on all levels...from government, to school, to religious institutions and home. Those on the so-called right do not want to acknowledge that not everyone acknowledges there is a G-d, much less then of course follow his words.

Can't we all just get along? Why can't we protect both gay's rights to follow what they want (and those who are Christians...leave it up to G-d to deal with accordingly)....and also protect free speech and the right to teach our children from G-d's word. If that means some mention in public schools, fine, but to then encroach into private schools, places of worship and homes is unconstitutional.

As for schools and this issue, children ultimately will have the choice to follow or not when they are adults. In the meantime, children really should not be exploring heterosexual, homosexual or any type of sexual relationship till they are adults anyway....when they are more emotionally ready. They should concentrate on being children, the three rs (along with history, science, art, music, etc), and learning to be productive (age appropriate chores, or later jobs) & fiscally responsible.

When those who are practicing alternate lifestyles come up with legislation that protects their freedom here (which again, is fine, they will have to answer to G-d, not man) as well as religious & parental freedoms, I'll gladly sign on board.

Unfortunately, that will never come. The majority are not learning from history. The pendulum swings one way, then the other. They haven't done that yet and therefore are just going to start a new wave of persecution in the opposite direction. One would think maybe the gay community would have a little more empathy for this concept. However I guess getting sweeping "revenge" on those who simply utilize the same book as others that spew hate is okay.

I'd hope a supposed fellow RP supporter could see the brainwashing on both sides of the argument. You clearly see the problems on the so-called social "right", but still can't yet see equal problems on the "left"? This, like many other issues in this country (abortion, military, etc), is not a matter of either the "left" or "right" being correct. The answer is somewhere in the middle. This is just another way to keep us all enslaved. Give one side "power" over the other for a little while to make them feel like they have control....back and forth (like the two major parties switching back and forth for decades)...when in fact none of us really has freedom...most are too distracted and bickering to see the truth...at this rate we the people will never overcome oppression and get back to our Constitution.
 
Last edited:
This is a free speech issue. I should be able to call my religious ceremony whatever I want. This is a religious rights issue.

There is some fear-mongering coming from the yes on Prop 8 side, saying that religions will lose their tax exempt status if they don't marry gay people and gay marriage will HAVE to be taught in schools. Well, those actions may be lies or truth, but they are certainly fascist.. but so is saying that someone else can't have a gay marriage.

Why can't we just stop being fascist??
 
This is a free speech issue. I should be able to call my religious ceremony whatever I want. This is a religious rights issue.

There is some fear-mongering coming from the yes on Prop 8 side, saying that religions will lose their tax exempt status if they don't marry gay people and gay marriage will HAVE to be taught in schools. Well, those actions may be lies or truth, but they are certainly fascist.. but so is saying that someone else can't have a gay marriage.

Why can't we just stop being fascist??

You could also call it an individual rights issue. If 2 individuals want to engage in a legal ceremony, they should not need permission from the state. :) We can't stop being fascist because Woodrow Wilson ensured that fascism should be the American way, and noone challenged him properly. :(
 
This is a free speech issue. I should be able to call my religious ceremony whatever I want. This is a religious rights issue.

There is some fear-mongering coming from the yes on Prop 8 side, saying that religions will lose their tax exempt status if they don't marry gay people and gay marriage will HAVE to be taught in schools. Well, those actions may be lies or truth, but they are certainly fascist.. but so is saying that someone else can't have a gay marriage.

Why can't we just stop being fascist??

I really do not care if people have a religious ceremony or call it that.

Prop 8 side has a point...it isn't fear-mongering or lies....there has been precedent now set to force actions in the other direction in other states and countries. That is why the "protect marriage" legislation is gaining ground. The education system here in CA is downright hostile to those with beliefs in some areas. Prop 8, and like proposals, wouldn't have nearly as much traction if this weren't the case. Many people like myself are now caught between both sides. Ultimately, I need to be able to teach my children our beliefs without having them taken from the home by "well-meaning" govt officials that state I can't teach from the Bible due to their warped interpretation of what I might be teaching, or disagreement with the Bible all together.

We just need to leave each other alone on these matters...instead we have modern day witch hunts.

I agree, we need to stop being fascist and start protecting both sides. Yet, I haven't really seen anyone doing that yet....
 
You could also call it an individual rights issue. If 2 individuals want to engage in a legal ceremony, they should not need permission from the state. :) We can't stop being fascist because Woodrow Wilson ensured that fascism should be the American way, and noone challenged him properly. :(


So true :(

Much of this could be settled by abolishing the IRS, setting up a VAT tax, having our government spend less, and allowing true freedom of choice in education.

I hope to see this one day, but unfortunately I think in reality it will never happen as too many people even on this forum can't see beyond the smoke and mirrors.
 
I think in some ways it's equivalent to having one parent. Maybe a tiny bit better, in that there may be more financial resources available. However, like a single-parent family, the gay family lacks individuals of both genders in caregiver roles for the child. This denies the child the opportunity to form relationships with both a mother and father.

You're saying that as if every other child in the world had a choice or is 100% satisfied with their parents. Denies a child? Who owes a child ANY care or love?

It may be just as good/bad as a single parent, so what can be worse to have an extra helper for money or company?
 
I really do not care if people have a religious ceremony or call it that.

Prop 8 side has a point...it isn't fear-mongering or lies....there has been precedent now set to force actions in the other direction in other states and countries. That is why the "protect marriage" legislation is gaining ground. The education system here in CA is downright hostile to those with beliefs in some areas. Prop 8, and like proposals, wouldn't have nearly as much traction if this weren't the case. Many people like myself are now caught between both sides. Ultimately, I need to be able to teach my children our beliefs without having them taken from the home by "well-meaning" govt officials that state I can't teach from the Bible due to their warped interpretation of what I might be teaching, or disagreement with the Bible all together.

We just need to leave each other alone on these matters...instead we have modern day witch hunts.

I agree, we need to stop being fascist and start protecting both sides. Yet, I haven't really seen anyone doing that yet....
If you want to protect your children from the corrupt liberal education system, KEEP THEM OUT, PERIOD. Don't wait for them to teach that gay marriage is ok and Mexican border jumpers are our equals when they're already teaching evolution, sharing is caring, and refusing to lead prayer.
 
Hey, I didn't say G-d hated gays. He doesn't. I don't. I'm not saying there aren't Christians that do and spout off wrongly. Heck, I'm sure there are atheists, agnostics, and other religions that do. I'm sure in reverse there are gays who hate anyone that are not gay or do not wholly support and jump up and down for their cause. Please don't lump all that believe the Bible at it's word as people who hate gays. If we could come together on this issue more we could move ahead in on our country on other freedoms.

Right, I don't hate murder or blacks either, but I won't teach my child to be black or a murderer, just because I don't like it, doesn't mean it's wrong, but I get to teach what I want to my kids, right?
 
What individuals do in their bedrooms is no business of mine, but this is what I teach my children:

Broken/retarded humans make the best employees/civillians/serfs...

This minority lifestyle is Applied Eugenics: don't breed/die young/easier to control.

Created/promoted like any other policy agenda (look to compulsory public education).

Study it, you may see, or not:

Here are a few sources:

Dennis Altman's 'The Homosexualization of America': How the cultural elite "reinvent human nature, reinvent themselves."..."promiscuity and 'impersonal sex' are determined more by social possibilities than by inherent differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals, or even between men and women."

'After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 1990's', by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen: the blueprint activists used to implement this campaign using media and vast money to radicalize America-by processes known as desensitization, jamming and conversion.

Robert Jay Lifton's 'Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism': the Chinese are the original masters of desensitization, jamming and conversion, Kirk/Madsen mirror it almost word-for-word.

'Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far' by Charles W. Socarides, M.D.: interesting/logical Darwinian argument.

All hinges on this Rockefeller funded 'junk science' done by this freak pedophile named Kinsey:

Kinsey's Pedophiles: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2061305218446628970&hl=en

ps: Promoting single parent family is policy agenda as well.

Obviously you've not seen Idiocracy.

Respecting retards as people makes societies and minorities WORSE, its only in our PC filter today that we find it wrong to say NOT ALL LIVES ARE EQUAL AND NOT ALL LIVES ARE BETTER THAN DEATH (just ask Henry). Dying young is BAD for slavery, slave owners WANT their machines to last as long as they can. Breeding CREATES slaves, unless a person is intelligent enough to control himself, you're much easier to control when you're in need of help for your children than when you're alone. WRONG ON ALL COUNTS FOR SLAVERY.

Nobody "PROMOTES" single families as if it's better than married couples, they promote respect for single families as appreciation and "better than nothing".
 
Again, I didn't write the words, they are in the Bible, G-d gave them to Moses. Take it up with Him.

I agree, you didn't write them , so you shouldn't have any responsibility for following it. Ain't it nice to have somebody else take credit for good things your preach?
 
How exactly is introducing a leglislation based on a democratic vote for protecting an institution by semantics and thought crime "getting along"?

I don't get what you are saying here....

Are you trying to say that enacting legislation by democratic vote to protect marriage is protecting "an institution" of "semantics" and by doing so makes alternative lifestyles "thought crimes"?

If so, then again, look at the other side. There are already "thought crimes" being enforced on those who do not agree with gay marriage....arguably also an "institution of semantics". If they would cease stop doing so, maybe as many people wouldn't feel the legislation necessary.
 
If so, then again, look at the other side. There are already "thought crimes" being enforced on those who do not agree with gay marriage....arguably also an "institution of semantics". If they would cease stop doing so, maybe as many people wouldn't feel the legislation necessary.

Please list and I will give you a better way to deal with these issues than "banning" a word.


This situation is fricking stupid. I just got an e-mail from my mom:


"Already in CA when you take out a marriage license it now says "Party 1" and "Party 2" instead of "Husband" and "Wife".
There will be a cascade of lawsuits that will cost taxpayers money.
Churches will be forced to have same sex marriages or their tax status will be changed.
One lawsuit that has already come to court and been decided makes it mandatory for all health clinics in CA to perform invitro(sic) fertilization for same sex couples even if the clinic doesn't believe in it. Just like in MA the Catholic Church dissolved its adoption agencies because they are forced to give babies to same sex couples."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI-GjWY-WlA




WTF?!!

It seems like a vote "Yes" or "No" is a vote for fascism :mad::mad::mad::mad:

Either that, or there is some major scare mongering going on here.
 
Last edited:
I agree, you didn't write them , so you shouldn't have any responsibility for following it. Ain't it nice to have somebody else take credit for good things your preach?

By your logic then, gee, none of us needs to follow the Constitution either or any laws. We didn't write them...so we shouldn't have any responsibility for following them either?

That wasn't what I was saying, but good try.

Your last few posts...well let's just say I do not think you have really a logical train of thought to your arguments....that or they need to be expressed more clearly (and correct spelling would help too). Perhaps it is a level of off or dry sarcasm I'm not catching online...can't tell.

"If you want to protect your children from the corrupt liberal education system, KEEP THEM OUT, PERIOD. Don't wait for them to teach that gay marriage is ok and Mexican border jumpers are our equals when they're already teaching evolution, sharing is caring, and refusing to lead prayer."

They already teach gay marriage as not just okay, but a valid option to Kindergarten and 1st graders in CA schools, there is no waiting...it is here and has been here. Clearly you are not as current on this topic as you think you may be...

I'm not sure where you add the "Mexican border jumpers are our equals when they're already teaching evolution, sharing is caring, and refusing to lead prayer." into this discussion at all. It is off topic. For the record I'm against illegal immigration, but not against the people themselves (regardless of country or race)...just immigrate legally. I'd prefer prayer not be led by teachers or administrators in public school...whose prayer, what type? It is not a place for public schools but private religious schools and homeschools. However students should feel free to pray by themselves or with other students in a group if they like. "Sharing is caring", uh? Lost me there as I'm guessing this refers to a program vs actual meaning "sharing is caring"... Evolution....yes they only teach evolution in many schools, heaven forbid they teach about intelligent design and creation as competing ideas as well and let children decide for themselves. Again, the matter is choice. My children are learning about creation, intelligent design and evolution. We teach them what the Bible says, but ultimately they get to choose. They know about gay marriage....eventually they get a choice. However, at their age (7, 5, and 1)....it doesn't need to be front and center. If they read the Bible growing up and want to go a different way, then that is their choice. However, it is the moral compass to which we guide them....everyone espouses to some idea of morality whether they think they do or not.

I'm not sure if you are really for one side or another or just playing devil's advocate. To be honest, since I do teach at home, nurse a baby, run a household, etc....don't have a whole lot of time to go back and forth on this. I'm guessing you are in your teens or twenties and have a bit more time....if so, I remember the days....wasn't that long ago. It's been fun nonetheless.

BTW, our children are out of the public school system to get a diverse education. No dry textbooks, but instead read real books and encyclopedias from a variety of view points. I'm teaching them to think, not be brainwashed from the "left" or "right". They'll eventually read the Constitution, Federalist papers, and eventually the Communist Manifesto (so they can understand the difference), as well as about all forms of government. They probably run into people of various ages, race, and political views more often then most public or private school children. My problem is what is being adopted by the public education system is not just staying there; there are those who feel it needs to be "enforced" at other levels, to include private schools and religious institutions.

Just curious, where do/did you go to school: public institution, private institution, or "private school" at home?

I did find the comment quoted below to lucius interesting. I think I've seen you argue this before...alluding to eugenics being okay. Perhaps you are with the "over-population" crowd too. Have you read 'A Brave New World' and 'A Brave New World Revisited' by Aldus Huxley? If not, suggest you do. Introducing sex-ed concepts from K & 1 grades doesn't help the world become free from slavery either. Anyway, I'd beg to differ on one of your comments, I think for some they may be easier to control when they are "in need of help for your children"....but that is assuming parents need help for their children. I could argue I've seen just as many people that are alone that are just as dependent on that same "help" that enslaves them. For some, children are the "wake-up" call that produces a great understanding of freedom and therefore then fight even harder to establish a new lineage of education in that matter.

Even still...I'll try to check out Idiocracy some time....from the Wikipedia it looks a fun "B" rated movie. And, because I do follow the Bible, and am the mothering type…if the SHTF and you were to migrate up from LA and come to my door (in peace) looking for help…I would gladly feed you and help you not become dependent on the system…despite our differences on Prop 8....just come sporting a RP t-shirt so I know it is you, okay ;)

"Obviously you've not seen Idiocracy.

Respecting retards as people makes societies and minorities WORSE, its only in our PC filter today that we find it wrong to say NOT ALL LIVES ARE EQUAL AND NOT ALL LIVES ARE BETTER THAN DEATH (just ask Henry). Dying young is BAD for slavery, slave owners WANT their machines to last as long as they can. Breeding CREATES slaves, unless a person is intelligent enough to control himself, you're much easier to control when you're in need of help for your children than when you're alone. WRONG ON ALL COUNTS FOR SLAVERY."
 
Please list and I will give you a better way to deal with these issues than "banning" a word.


This situation is fricking stupid. I just got an e-mail from my mom:


"Already in CA when you take out a marriage license it now says "Party 1" and "Party 2" instead of "Husband" and "Wife".
There will be a cascade of lawsuits that will cost taxpayers money.
Churches will be forced to have same sex marriages or their tax status will be changed.
One lawsuit that has already come to court and been decided makes it mandatory for all health clinics in CA to perform invitro(sic) fertilization for same sex couples even if the clinic doesn't believe in it. Just like in MA the Catholic Church dissolved its adoption agencies because they are forced to give babies to same sex couples."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI-GjWY-WlA




WTF?!!

It seems like a vote "Yes" or "No" is a vote for fascism :mad::mad::mad::mad:

Either that, or there is some major scare mongering going on here.


Yes Danno....a vote "Yes" or "No" is a vote for fascism here....that is what I am saying! We are damned either way. Gotta love CA. Glad I'm only here for a few years (I hope at least).

There is not scare mongering going on....there have already been cases in Canada, Mass, CA, etc. Without Prop 8 people feel like they have no freedom of religion. I'm not saying Prop 8 is the right answer, but I can see how it came about....backs are against the wall on this one. I know a lot of people teaching at home that are out campaigning for it that normally would not have taken such a stance.

Josh...if you are reading, you can breathe a sigh of relief...I'm not voting for Prop 8...

I'm an AZ resident. Thank G-d I do not have to vote on it. I really think it is lose-lose scenario and unfortunately one that seems to being sweeping the country.
 
Are we such a society that cares more about semantics than practicality? Why are we so afraid to say "I just hate gays and I don't think they should be treated like people" if that's how we truly feel?

One HUGE irritation. Barack Obama LOVES to pull this one. I remember the MTV/MySpace forum when he was asked about it. He hesitated, struggling to contrive some sort of no-lose answer as he usually does, and then spewed that he does "not believe in gay marriage. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. But what I do support is civil unions." I flipped out and turned off the TV for the rest of the night. If you do not like gays getting married, JUST SAY SO! Stop the civil union nonsense. "Protecting marriage" is a petty, trivial phrase that is simply politics at its best.
 
One HUGE irritation. Barack Obama LOVES to pull this one. I remember the MTV/MySpace forum when he was asked about it. He hesitated, struggling to contrive some sort of no-lose answer as he usually does, and then spewed that he does "not believe in gay marriage. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. But what I do support is civil unions." I flipped out and turned off the TV for the rest of the night. If you do not like gays getting married, JUST SAY SO! Stop the civil union nonsense. "Protecting marriage" is a petty, trivial phrase that is simply politics at its best.

thanks very much!!
 
Yes Danno....a vote "Yes" or "No" is a vote for fascism here....that is what I am saying! We are damned either way. Gotta love CA. Glad I'm only here for a few years (I hope at least).

That's not how things work in producing props. Voting YES is almost always an introduction of new laws and new regulations. When in doubt, you're usually told to vote NO, and let it come again in case it's so good an idea.
 
Back
Top