From the office of U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski:
MIKULSKI STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT’S DECISION TO RULE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) today released the following statement after the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA):
“I applaud the U.S. Supreme Court for striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Today, they affirmed that all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation, are entitled to equal protection under the law.
“As we continue to respect the legal rights of all American citizens, we must remain respectful of the beliefs of religious organizations and their desire to recognize same sex unions.
“To those who have fought tirelessly for their constitutional rights, as well as their families, friends, and supporters, I congratulate you on your victory. I am proud to see the day that marriage equality becomes the law of the land, and not just in my home state of Maryland.”
not good
Get over it. Hate is a terrible thing to have. Why embrace it like you do?
Absolutely disgusting.
Who is she kidding?
A constitutional right to get married?
Two have to agree. Otherwise, forcing upon another? I thought no means no.
This is a sham.
Equality huh? So when are you getting married, Babs?
Remember folks, if you think the government can grant you rights, then they can take them away.
Harumph.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket! God help us all!
“BelAir Fed”, “Daniel McAndrew” & “Bandit” are bigoted idiots. This was a great decision and a great occasion! Please give me ONE legitimate reason that everyone (unless proven guilty of a crime) should NOT be privy to the same civil rights and liberties that the vast majority of us enjoy! (and since The U.S. is NOT a theocracy “thank god”, I don’t want to hear any biblical explanations!).
she voted for DOMA in 1996 – now the winds blew another way and so did she – not good – and no BIBLE involved – you small minded name calling moron.
And another thing – the best boss I ever worked for – gay – did not hate him – wish he was still boss. What I do hate are politicians that don’t stand for anything – BABS liked Bill Clinton who was stuck in a hard spot – so she and Paul Sarbanes helped him out and voted for DOMA. Now years later “she’s evolved” to the flavor of the moment.
Hey hypocrite “Richard Cranium”, I believe in evolution, don’t you?
By the way….do you still wear the same clothes as you did when you were wearing diapers? I thought so…..
Evolution is skewed, Creationalism is more than likely correct. The stories of DNA manipulation in India involving SHIVA, is very interesting. More than likely, we are a creation of a higher race. Sumerian tablets have even stated that we were created by the Annunaki, to serve the Annunaki and mine gold for them. Truth is we were probably a slave race that was eventually abandoned because our usefulness was worn out.
ha ha ha! That is awesome. I wonder if that higher race got gay-married. Odds are they were probably homosexual polygamist animal fu%$ers. When they come back and visit us they can probably apply for federal benefits.
I once worked for a gay man.
It left a bad taste in my mouth.
Maybe next time tell him to eat more cinnamon, you might like it more.
You will also stand before God when you leave this earth.
Gee, think He will think your comments were good.
I talk to God regularly Rita. He thinks you’re a little uptight and suggests you vacation in Costa Rica. Or any other place that is unlike this tiny part of the world you live in.
You will also stand before God when you leave this earth.
Gee, think He will think your comments were good.
“Rita”, I will now include you in the “bigoted idiot” group with your predecessors.
(and don’t try to tell me who I will “stand before” when I “leave this earth”)
I’d rather have “this earth” a better place FOR EVERYONE while I’m living on it!
God gives us our rights? Really? I guess when the constitution was amended over and over that God was speaking to our legislators. And when the court decided DOMA was unconstitutional yesterday, 5/4 of god was in favor of getting rid of DOMA.
Face it, Jesus was a homosexual and so was his dad, otherwise the decision yesterday would have been different.
Stop believing a 2000 year old fairy tale and live in the 21st century. We make the world we live in, so let’s make it as nice a place to live in for everyone. Just because the declaration of independence says, “… that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,…” doesn’t mean our rights are given to us by god. It only means the writers of that document believed that to be so. Since we have felt the need to change what those rights are over the centuries, they were clearly mistaken.
God bless.
you show how simple you are. Make a comment that offends people and then you say God Bless. Does that mean that people who hate can live in your place. People who don’t agree with anything you say can live in your place? And what creator are you talking about? Budda, Jesus, God, Allah, Yahweh? So you are not making any sense and think you know what you are talking about.
Are those the only possible creators? How about Zeus, Odin or Poseidon? I would never say anything to offend someone, now go get gay-married!
you did and guess you can get married and get federal benefits……
how about that…sucker.
For real, if those gods you are referring to are possible creators then why do those religions all claim their god came from something else? Zeus, was the son of Kronos. Poseidon was a brother of Zeus. Odin was the belief in Zeus (aka Jupiter) extended into the Nordic cultures. You are comparing idols to Jehovah and his son, which is forbidden in Christian religion. Please, have some decency.
Yes, the one and true only god is the christian god. I’m sorry. How stupid of me.
Your god is nothing more than a fairy tale that even children know is silly. Stop believing in fairy tales. Start living in the 21st century and get gay-married.
And does the abundance of other manifestations fail to compel you to believe maybe yours is not the one? Or perhaps some watered down version of the true one? Or maybe he doesn’t exist at all and its an anthropomorphic creation to make man feel important in the grand entropy increasing scheme of things?
Amen “Brother Jesus was Gay”!
Thanks for being in the 21st century with the rest of us enlightened individuals. 🙂
So you don’t believe your rights are god given, then lets talk about the second place your rights come from… The second amendment. Wait, you probably don’t believe in that either.
Rights are given by those who right them into law. I don’t know why conservatives continue to believe that their fairy tale god has anointed this country as the greatest ever.
The constitution is nothing more than a document, written a long time ago that has had to be changed because the people that wrote it knew very little about the world around them. We too know very little compared to what we will know in 100 years, most likely that Jesus loved the c#$k, was a liar, and religion is as silly today as it has ever been.
I find your comments particularly offensive. In one forum, you have managed to tarnish about 2000 years of faith in the Christian beliefs. Someone should pull the plug on your computer.
Christians have done just fine tarnishing their faith. I’m just pissing on what’s left.
Now go get gay-married. It’s what Jesus would have wanted.
Christians have been tarnishing Christian beliefs for centuries. He didn’t start it and he’s not likely to be the last one to critique Christians and their tightly held dogmas.
Why are you so focused on that particular amendment? Does that have anything to do with gay marriage? Just how much interpretation of the Constitution are you willing to engage in to support your lost cause?
Gays enjoy guns as much as the next guy.
Whiners and troglodytes all of you that are filled with hate and loathing for a decision that does not impact you in the least. If someone chose to get a large pizza with cheese while you were standing in line to get yours with pepperoni – would you also deny them that right for that choice? And as for morality – it’s not as hard and fast as some of you mouth breathers believe. And from my moral perspective you are immoral for forcing your morality on the rest of us. Please show up for your public stoning. Live your life the way you see fit – don’t infringe on other people’s choices that do not affect you. Get over yourselves. Your opinion about someone else does not matter in the least.
Whatever your opinion right or wrong it absolutely does affect everyone. It will absolutely end up costing much more for an entire goody bag full of state and federal services, insurance costs will be higher…adoption, bringing “spouses” into the country for green cards and citizenship, etc. Plus the entire very odd cultural change – read a headline a couple weeks ago that simply said “Ellen Degenerous and Portia de Rossi are having a baby”. Sorry…that’s bizarre. We’ve gotten to such a weird place as a culture that we are forced to assist people in pretending they have physical functions they don’t have. Gays will never have babies, it’s not really a marriage in that sense. That’s just a fact.
I didn’t realize that you have to have the ability to have kids to get married. I guess all of those heterosexual married couples out their that have tried for years to have kids, but have been unsuccessful are living in sin and thier marriage “isn’t really a marriage in that sense.” And to say that gays will never have babies…never is a pretty long time. Human cloning is not far away, which will allow a single person, gay or straight, to have a baby.
I guess eye glasses are pretty weird to you too, huh? wheelchairs? transplanted organs? Physical functions do not define us. They limit us. Fortunately we have overcome many of those limitations. It’s time for you to recognize your own limitations, especially that you are an idiot.
What are you talking about? Nothing you’ve written here has anything remotely to do with what I wrote. Most of it makes no sense “physical functions do not define us they limit us”. Huh?
Try to read it again. I know the big words make it difficult for you.
Bet you’re fun to be around.
Being deliberately offensive does not help your cause – fellow gays might wish you to leave that attitude at the door because it turns people off that might otherwise be empathetic.
I’m not gay…I just enjoy beign deliberately offensive to bigots like you and apparently the majority of citizens in Harford County.
No go help your mother recover from what happened to her last night. She is going to need her walker.
Case in point!
“…It will absolutely end up costing much more for an entire goody bag full of state and federal services, insurance costs will be higher…adoption, bringing “spouses” into the country for green cards and citizenship, etc…” By that logic, I guess we shouldn’t have given rights to blacks. Damn, that cost us a lot of money! Your bigotry is appalling.
Hey “Money Tree”, there are MANY straight couples that never have (or can’t have) babies. Is that bizarre (or is it just “gods will”?) Whatever……….
I just love all of these people forcing thing down our throats. I am not for gay marriage and do not believe in it, but they have the right. Babs, you do a great job on veteran issues and I am proud that you do, but I don’t like the fact that you are gloating on this issue. Marriage is not a right for Americans. A right is able to vote, pay taxes and not be discriminated because of race, color or creed. So all you bigots who complain because there are citizens that do not agree with gay marriage, you need to check yourself. Why is it ok for you to make negative comments and think you are above everyone else. I fought for this country and have seen other nations that do not have a 1st amendment. So all you people waving the gay flag…..go live over there and try and do the same thing! Bet you wouldn’t last a day. and the one who says Jesus was gay….You show your ignorance and prove the point that just because you don’t like heterosexual marriage…..as the book say, “Don’t be a bully Billy”
Jesus was Gay. It’s what I believe. I guess that makes me ignorant.
I didn’t realize that I was forcing gay marriage down your throat, but I know that I got something else I can shove down your throat. Now go get gay-married!
guess you are showing your intelligence. So why don’t you just go live in a country that allows you to express your ideas and then lock you up.
now why would I do that? I can express my ideas right here and not get locke up. It sounds to me like you are showing your intelligence, or lack there of.
Obviously you can believe what you want, but don’t let your beliefs infringe upon the rights of others. Last time I checked, when gays get married they don’t infringe on any of your rights.
I’m marrying my dog so he can get federal benefits too. Those lyme disease shots and heartworm pills are taking me broke. Hope I can get him WIC, SNAP and a housing voucher too.
Your dog could do way better.
“Jesus was Gay”….LOL what a moron… Sounds like the words of experience ,,,OH BTW do you prefere chunky or smooth???? LOL
Jesus was Gay,
You set gays back with your comments. Feel free to continue your rants about religion because you live in a country that allows it. Oh, wait a minute, you can be fired for saying things that aren’t politically correct. Hmmmm, seems like a double standard to me.
Yes, my words on the dagger are setting gays back. People that once supported gays and biggots like yourself will now REALLY fight to stop gay rights. You’re an idiot. You should go get gay-married.
The court’s decision my actually help Marlyand’s economy as gay couples from surrounding states will come to Maryland to get married for the federal rights. I would think you racist/homophobic conservatives would be supportive of that.
Rarely are you fired for saying this that are politically incorrect unless you are well above the threshold of attention of the masses. At best you can expect a good scolding and told to stand over in a corner.
rarely are you fired for anything being a fed
Why do the same few people troll nonstop this news website for comments about “social issues” and keep referring to ‘majority of Harford county’? There are over 240,000 residents in Harford, and usually less than 30 people making comments here. WTF?
Because Harford County voted overwhelmingly against gay marriage in the last election. Why would anyone think that the majority of people that live in Harford County read the dagger? You would have to be retarded. I guess that explains your assumption.
Is your comment the majority of Harford County, or the Harford county residents who voted?
Majority of Harford county residents, you would need over half the population of votes out of approx 1/4 million residents
For the record, I would prefer to see a factual and reliable website that documented the particular ‘overhwleming’ vote.
I’m sure you will comment with some more insightful knowledge, or resort to some more vulgar name calling as you have been.
Look it up…have you ever heard of Google?
2012 Question 6 to legalize same sex marriage
Harford County
65485 against (56%)
51696 for (44%)
Now, go get gay-married!
Im not interested in looking it up, you quoted the stats and now provided a copy and paste.
13,789 more votes is hardly a “overwhelmingly” greater number.
Those two numbers together don’t even total half the population of Harford county.
I guess we will never really know how it could have went if more people hit the polls.
Trite old adage that remains true “never mud wrestle with a pig – you only get dirty and the pig likes it”. I suggest we cease feeding the troll.
You’re a racist, a bigot, and a liar. You should go spend all of your money on gold and lock in a safe in your basement…the gays are coming!
The liberal argument against conservatives in one sentence……love it.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck….
then marry it
It cracks me up that a certain pro-gay fundamentalists think that disagreeing with homosexuality as a positive social norm equates to bigotry.
It does equate to bigotry. The root is fear and hate and ignorance. It doesn’t affect you but it offends you. Just like my existence on this planet. Find something positive to do with your life instead of coming here and demonstrating your intolerance. It’s good for your immortal soul if you have one.
I respectfully disagree. Nobody, certainly not me is suggesting you or any other gay person leave the planet, be removed from a church, denied employment, threatened or beat up, shown disrespect as a human being…the list is pretty long of what I believe you are entitled to. However to use an analogy (apologies in advance) I’ll never play basketball because I’m just not that tall but I want to force my way into the NBA, requiring everyone play fair to let me win, and that the rules be changed so the game really doesn’t end up being basketball at all. In my mind it doesn’t matter if the game becomes diminished to the point that it’s hardly worth watching because my participation matters more. The rules that made the game great, kept it popular and exciting only serve to keep me out so hell with the rules. In fact, to hell with the NBA, what we’ll have left is barely bball anymore but I will have gotten my way. Basketball has been played for thousands of years this way and it’s resulted in a fabulous game that benefits nearly everyone, but hell with the NBA if I can’t play.
So you are equating marriage to the NBA? That has to be one of the stupidest analogies I have ever heard. Now take your ball and go home shorty. You realize the NBA filled primarily with African Americans. I am surprised your intolerant self chose that as an example.
It’s an analogy – didn’t say they were the same.
Interestingly they are all skilled in Basketball. Marriage is not as exclusive.
ball handlers
I’m sorry, but a disagreement concerning this issue does not equate to bigotry.
I certainly don’t fear or hate homosexuals. In fact, I have a fair number of friends who are homosexual and who know my thoughts on this issue and are not offended in the least. They certainly know the difference between bigotry and holding a differing opinion on this matter.
But you’re entirely wrong on this matter not affecting those of us who are not gay or lesbian. Ever since the sexual revolution when our culture started to see the melding of sexual preferences/acts with personal identity, disagreement with the former came to be seen as an attack on the later. (Which, by the way, you clearly demonstrated in your comments above). My point here is that since this has now been construed as a issue of personhood and any disagreement is seen as a personal attack, you can guarantee that this will have seismic effects on free speech rights in public education, churches, and other areas of would-be public discourse. It will also have huge effects on the curriculum taught in our own county’s education system.
“I have friends who are….” Heard that before. No it does not make you a bigot, at least not to other bigots.
I didn’t expect you to have a logical, reasoned comment reply.
It’s so very easy to throw words at people. I think reasoned differences on this issue will continue. Of the handful of gay marriage supporters on this thread you seem the most thoughtful but even you make accusations. It isn’t bigoted to have concern for the future state of the American family when we begin to water down the importance of traditional family values. Pulling the bigot, liar, racist cards doesn’t help find common ground. You excluded – I wish there were a way to flag those who abuse the privilege of public comment by being repulsive and foul for effect.
Excellent response, Brian.
How absolutely revolting. Mikulski wouldn’t know or understand constitutional rights if she wallpapered all the rooms in her house with copies of it. Earth to Mikulski: The federal government has no business getting into the subject of marriage, in any way, shape, or form. It is NOT one of the roles granted to them by we the people. It’s time for you to RETIRE !!!! You have done enough destruction to our state and country.
Which is why DOMA was ruled unconstitutional. Nice to see you agree that government should stay out of the bedroom.
I might be naive but why cannot designated “domestic partners” and “spouses” be entitled to the very same benefits under the law. Why must the sacrament of marriage be required for legal and economic quality to be a reality.
I almost always support Senator Mikulski on social welfare issues, but her far-reaching stands on gay marriage and abortion are too liberal for me.
I’ve thought that since day one, but suggesting civil unions or domestic partners as a legal description rather than marriage gets a bunch of drama from the activists. They say it suggests what they would have is different or less than marriage.
Marriage in nearly all cultures has been seen as a conjugal and pro-creative union centered on the propagation of children and family. Forsaking the concept of marriage as a sacramental union for now, as we live in a secular nation, the state has definite interest in maintaining and promoting this conjugal and pro-creative understanding of marriage. It is in the best interest of the state for a host of reasons. This propagation of man and the interests of the state cannot be fulfilled in a homosexual union. They are just biologically impossible. In fact, homosexual unions are by nature imitations of heterosexual unions (not in the sense that real love cannot or does not exists, but on the base level that it requires heterosexual unions for their maintenance and ability to exist and the fact that they borrow from and copy heterosexual unions – both physically and socially).
Much of what you say rings true. I repeat the example of the headline “Ellen DeGenerous and Portia de Rossi are having a baby”. Stunning in it’s lie – those two are no more having a baby than my dog can fly and yet the expectation that we all participate in this playacting just so as to placate what really is biologically “mistaken” behavior is pretty common now.
Tell y’all what …take away all the benefits and advantages that the Federal Govt. bestows on married couples, so that they enjoy no Govt. sponsored benefits that put them above the rest of us, and this whole issue goes away. Is the straight community willing to give up those Govt. subsidies? Getting Govt. out of the marriage business is a great idea- marriage is a religious institution. Contracts are business institutions. If the Fed stops subsidizing marriage through the various tax benefits given to married couples, think of the $$$$ all we taxpayers will save. Let the Churches(whatever flavor) look to our spiritual well being, if we desire such looking after. Stop the taxpayer subsidy of marriage. I would think that fiscal conservatives would be all over that idea.
Let’s also begin to tax churches and other religious institutions. It’s only fair
Of course marriage is a religious institution, that’s why you need a lawyer to get divorced…
Oh wait… nevermind….
Heterosexuals have been ruining the sanctity of marriage for centuries. Why not let gays have a shot at it? Remember, Jesus had 12 disciples…all the gays want is just one.
All of you that espouse reasons for not allowing gay marriage are silly. There is no negative consequence on any one or any thing when gays are permitted to marry.
God bless you all…just remember that he was gay and so was his son.
TELL IT TO THE POE ……a–HOLE
POPE …..and you’re still an A—HOLE
I’ll tell it to anyone, especially your mother. She never gets tired of it.
The pope is in favor of gay marriage anyway…he and all of his underlings have had enough gay sex with little boys to make homosexuality a requirement for sainthood.
It seems more normal to me to be married to five women rather than one man. Is polygamy next?
Why not? Sounds good to me. But why stop at 5. Why not 100?
Jesus had 12 men in his life. I would definitely not want to disappoint him.
Maybe Mikulski will now marry her girlfriend.
Still waiting for someone to post an objective, secular argument in opposition of gay marriage. Being personally opposed because of your religious beliefs or because you think homosexuality is “unnatural” is fine and dandy but that’s hardly a reason for the Supreme Court to uphold DOMA. And please spare me the “sanctity of marriage,” arguments. The divorce rate in the US has been roughly 50% for some time now and there is no conclusive evidence (from reputable, independent studies) that shows gay couples are any worse at maintaining a healthy marriage or that children with gay parents are worse off than children with parents of the opposite sex. Unless you plan on marrying someone of your gender, this will not effect you. Your opinions on the subject may cause you discomfort, but that is hardly a reason to pass legislation in opposition of gay marriage or anything else for that matter.
My objective, secular argument is that the government shouldn’t be involved in *any* personal relationships. This should be a 1st Amendment issue related to free speech only. You want to say you’re married? Great. Equal treatment to absolutely everyone by leaving marriage 100% out of any federal business.
How’s that?
Impossible. Marriage has to be defined by the government because of the tax code, property rights shared between married couples (or groups…maybe one day!) and beneficiary requirements.
Absolutely. Very good.
@PB: I would have to agree, although Jesus was Gay also makes a good point below (in regards to taxes, property, etc.).
Scratch that “below” part. I was referring to the comment above.
I have laid out a partial objection to you, based on reason and secular (and not just secular, but naturalistic) thought, but you don’t want to hear it. Namely, the state has a vested interest in real marriage which propagates humanity in a sustainable way, self-perpetuating manner. Homosexuality does not – cannot – do this. Homosexual unions, as I mentioned upthread, are by nature imitations of heterosexual unions (not in the sense that real love cannot or does not exists, but on the base level that it requires heterosexual unions for their maintenance and ability to exist and the fact that they borrow from and copy heterosexual unions – both physically and socially).
Homosexually is not ordered biologically to be a strength trait of survival. You may not like that. You may not agree with it. That’s fine. It’s not bigotry, it’s not fear, it’s not hate. It’s just a biological and natural observation.
Politically, I’d rather the state stay merely say in the interest of maintaining armed forces, having people to tax, and maintaining social order, marriage is recognized between a man and a woman as it has always been.
It takes a man and a woman to create a child. It’s not a stretch to say that it takes a man and a woman to raise a child. But again, that’s crux. Procreating/children/family has been gutted from the modern concept of marriage and it has been reduced to the level of a self-interest contract.
And the argument that this doesn’t affect someone is illogical. Again, it will big societal ramification, especially on free speech rights and education.
Just because you are gay-married doesn’t mean you can’t procreate. People that are married can have sex with anyone they want, some married couples encourage it. The human race is not going to stop reproducing because gay people can get married.
Your observation that homosexuality is not a “biological strength trait” is silly. Chimpanzees have gay sex all of the time. You are an idiot.
And, no, it does not take a man and a woman to make a child. It takes a sperm and an egg, and probably pretty soon, just an egg and a somatic body cell. We can produce both sperm and egg cells from stem cells. Nature has evolved all kinds of tricks to make reproduction possible without male on female sex.
It definitely does not take a man and a woman to raise a child. The evolved sexual desires that go along with heterosexuality, as well as homosexuality, are what have always, and will always, disrupt YOUR concept of marriage. But don’t be so close-minded. What you think makes a modern marriage may be what most people think, but not everybody. In fact, it looks like the majority are starting to disagree with you.
What societal ramifications are going to occur that will harm us because gays can be married and receive federal benefits?
To sum up your point: If an asteroid strikes the earth and the only surviving colony is a group of homosexuals in a bunker– we’re in trouble. (that’s an over-simplification and not entirely true, but it certainly captures your Darwinistic argument)
I don’t agree with or support homosexuality, but the issue for the SCOTUS is merely a matter of finding a compelling reason for the state to infringe upon this personal freedom. On many other matters, the state does this all the time, and mostly for good compelling reasons. In this case, it did not find one (more or less). It was only a matter of time before this case was brought and the decision came down. I haven’t read this decision, but I have ready many many others. Based on that, careful reading of the Constitution and supporting documents (for framer intent), there’s really not much that makes you think the Court would ever decide otherwise.
There are plenty of good arguments to be made if you don’t support this, but precious few of them have any legal significance.
For me, it’s very similar to abortion, which I also don’t support. But until the beginning of life can conclusively be proven scientifically without question, the state has only a marginal role to play on the issue. And my guess is that long before that happens, science will have figured out how to remove the basic components of life from a pregnant mother and preserve them for gestation by some other means, thereby eliminating the need for abortions completely.
In both cases, for those opposed, concern yourself more with changing hearts and minds rather than changing laws. People don’t always obey laws anyway, and are much more likely to follow their hearts.
I certainly don’t think we’re ever going to get anywhere through name-calling, mockery, fear, misrepresentation, or disrespect. Never in human history have these things created lasting and permanent change in the world. It’s sadly amusing that they are still employed so frequently.
@noble: Exactly my point. The issue obviously raises a lot of emotion of both sides of the argument, but from a legal standpoint there is no justification to prohibit gay marriage.
The problem I have with your argument is that it implies that allowing homosexual marriage will somehow reduce procreation. Marriage or not, many gay couples have children and procreate (via sperm donation, or surrogates) and since marriage is not something that is finite or limited to a specific number I can’t see how allowing gays to marry will reduce heterosexual marriage and procreation. The average couple (if not the majority of couples in stable, committed relationships) is not going to base their decision to have children on whether or not couples of the same/opposite gender can marry.
As for the concept of family being “gutted,” I can agree that the traditional nuclear family is no longer the norm, but that is hardly justification or evidence that non-traditional, two-parent families aren’t as stable. Furthermore, the independent and reputable studies that have been done found no difference in the development of children raised by hetero or homosexual couples in a committed relationship or marriage. Opponents of gay marriage can and will continue to make these claims, but there is no evidence to back any of it up. Allowing gays to marry will have no more effect on you than “traditional marriage.” Yes, you may hear about it more and you may not like it, but your life will be no different. Your marriage will be as stable or unstable as it was before the Court’s decision, and honestly, why would you allow the relationship of another couple to redefine your own?
Forgetting all the emotional and procreational reasons behind opposition of gay marriage, why I oppose it is simple…I believe that marriage is a religious rite, not a civil right. Because of that belief, government does not have any place in marriage. The government does need to recognize unions because they are contracts that we have entered into and those contracts determine lots of things like tax status, benefits, inheritances, etc. To have true equality, and without government getting involved in religion, we all should be in civil unions, as far as the government is concerned. Beyond that, you can call it what you want, you can dislike it all you want, you can find a church to perform your ceremony, or not. Then everyone can shut up. But no one is looking for a true solution and true equality, everyone seems to be looking for an reason to divide and/or be superior in their tolerance. Who cares? Think about it logically. Also, because I feel that government should not be involved in religion, I believe that these types of rulings will have the government forcing religious institutions into providing benefits (against their beliefs) and probably forcing them into preforming the ceremonies (against their beliefs) and that will only happen to Christians or Jews, this current administration will never force this upon Islam. So you want to sit and talk about tolerance and equality, think logically about what you are saying. Equality in the government’s eyes is civil unions for all. That is it.
HERE’S THE BOTTOM LINE: INSTEAD OF GAYS IMPOSING THEIR WILL AND WAY OF LIFE ON MOST OF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY, IF THE GAY COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE RESPECTFULLY JUST SOUGHT A NEW LEGALIZED TRANSACTION, IDENTIFIED AS ANY TERM OTHER THAN ‘MARRIAGE’ (THEY COULD CALL IT ANYTHING THEY WANTED, EX. ‘GAY-MERGER’, ‘ALTERNATIVE-PARTNERSHIP’, ‘FRUIT-SALAD’ FOR ALL I CARE ) – BUT WITH THE SAME RIGHTS AS WHAT THE MAJORITY RECOGNIZES AND RESPECTS AS GOD-SANCTIONED, TRADITIONAL ‘MARRIAGE’ – THE WHOLE DISCUSSION COULD MOSTLY HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. BUT NO. INSTEAD – THE GAYS BULLIED AND INTIMIDATED. THEY DISRESPECTED THE MAJORITY, WHO HAD (AND STILL DOES HAVE) A RIGHT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE GOD-SANCTIONED, TRADITIONAL ‘MARRIAGE’ RESPECTED AND PROTECTED, AND REMAIN DEFINED AS IT HAS BEEN FOR CENTURIES….. RATHER THAN DISRESPECTED AND TRAMPLED UPON. SO: TO THOSE SELFISH, SELF-SERVING, ARROGANT, ELITIST I D I O T S WHO POMPOUSLY SIT THERE AND CLAIM THIS CAUSES NO ‘SOCIETAL HARM’ – YOU MAKE ME SICK, AND YOU MAKE ME EVEN MORE FRIGHTENED FOR THE STATE OF OUR COUNTRY – BECAUSE IF YOU CANNOT OR WILL NOT ADMIT THIS HAS DONE M A S S I V E ‘SOCIETAL’ HARM – THEN YOU YOURSELVES ARE INDEED DEPRAVED. YOU INDEED ARE A MENACE TO SOCIETY AND TO THE BEST INTERESTS AND WELFARE OF OUR COUNTRY. AND MAY GOD, INDEED, HELP YOU HEAL YOUR SICK AND DEPRAVED MINDS.
You’re welcome. Now go get gay-married!
There is no such thing as god-sanctioned anything except in your delusional little brain.
You can always move to another country!
I wish you would go get gay-married in Syria.
I have an idea. Leave the gays have the word marriage. Then we can make up a new term for a man/woman merger. Like “Hetero-Monogomous-Life-Long-Banging”.
Okay, I finally got through your post of shouting. Some key words/phrases that jumped out at me: “sick,” “depraved,” “fruit salad,” “DISRESPECTED AND TRAMPLED UPON”, and “SELFISH, SELF-SERVING, ARROGANT, ELITIST I D I O T S WHO POMPOUSLY SIT THERE AND CLAIM THIS CAUSES NO ‘SOCIETAL HARM’”.
My oh my, where to begin. Where to begin? How about by explaining that this debate is not a religious one. It is a constitutional/legal/political debate. So stop inserting the fact that you think marriage is “god-sanctioned.” When you sign a marriage certificate, it is a legal document, not a religious document. So get your blinders off. Your post is simply stating “YOUR” definintion of marriage.
Next, please state the societal harm? Are you being attacked by mobs of gays trying to stick rainbow stickers to your face? Are gays having sex in your bed? Are mobs of gays looting and robbing Bel Air? Are they forming gangs to sell drugs and mug people? What are you talking about???
Were you recently propositioned by gays to do something you didn’t want to do? Or is it merely their existence that brings your blood to a boil? Seek counsel and medication for your affliction. You really are not coping well with what other people do despite your objections.
Barbie’s still in office? Oh dear lord.
Where in the heck are all these gay people coming from? It’s gotta be the water. Yuck!
They have always been there, keeping out of sight of bigots like you. There was a time in history when your people were persecuted for their beliefs, preferences, race, heritage, and/or medical condition, and it doesn’t even matter who “your people” are because pretty much every person on the planet can be identified with a group that suffered at some point. If it wasn’t right to persecute “your people”, then it isn’t right to persecute others either. Grow up and enter the 21st century.
Sorry teacher but there is a fatal flaw in your argument. You identify the issue as one of persecution. That is not it. The issue is that I and many others, while accepting homosexuals as what they are, refuse to be cowed into the argument that they are normal. You can not in any way convince me that normalizing the abnormal is right. To persecute is to beat up, harass, imprison, etc. The Supreme Court blew it on this one and folks like Babs are simply on the wrong side of this.
The issue is that I and many others, while accepting religious fundamentalists as what they are, refuse to be cowed into the argument that they are normal. You cannot in any way convince me that normalizing the abnormal is right.
Do you also believe that terrorist acts and mass murders are God’s retribution for the acceptance of homosexuals in society?
WTF? What do mass murders and terrorist acts have to do with homosexual issues? If that is your example of logic I’m really glad to not have children coming to you for an education.
I don’t know what they have to do with it either, but apparently there are those among the religious right that think so. It was an absurdist remark for a reason. There is no logic there. There is also no logic to the argument that homosexuals are not normal simply because you say so or because they aren’t like you (and by extension you define “normal” as people like you). Are Muslims not normal? What about socialists? How about those who have arthritis? What about redheads? What about African Americans? Defining abnormal by sexual orientation is no different than defining abnormal by religious affiliation, political persuasion, medical conditions, genetic factors, or race.
Get over yourself Daddy Rabbit. It doesn’t matter what you think. This is precisely the point you are missing. While you may have an opinion and a prejudice, the rest of us really just have to put up with your intolerance as normal.
So, all the negative and hateful comments made by anonymous people on this website this past year about Harford County’s current County Executive wouldn’t be considered a bigot? eh? Ahahahaha.
big·ot
[ bígg?t ]
1.intolerant person: somebody with strong opinions, especially on politics, religion, or ethnicity, who refuses to accept different views
RU KIDDING says:
July 3, 2013 at 6:56 pm
Where in the heck are all these gay people coming from? It’s gotta be the water. Yuck!
It’s as if their just pulling them from their arses.