FairwoodKing;816447 wrote:Everyone who is an active member of a politically-charged church like the Mormons has something in common with all other Mormons. They all share certain values, even though there may be small individual differences. Similarly, most gays share certain values. I know hundreds of gays and lesbians because of my participation with Seattle Men's Chorus. Every one of them is in favor of gay marriage and they all oppose Don't Ask Don't Tell. Yes, there are gay conservatives. They are called Log Cabin Republicans. But even they are in favor of gay marriage and oppose DADT.

Try staying away from stereotyping for a while. I think you'll find it refreshing.

What is so radical about saying that all Mormons have something in common and that all gays have something in common? We gays know that the Mormon Church opposes our agenda. They proved that in California. Having one of them in the White House would not help the gay movement.

FairwoodKing;816458 wrote:What is so radical about saying that all Mormons have something in common and that all gays have something in common? We gays know that the Mormon Church opposes our agenda. They proved that in California. Having one of them in the White House would not help the gay movement.

Using that same logic would it be fair to say that all gays want to have butt sex, so if there were a gay in the white house then everyone would have to have butt sex?

FairwoodKing;816458 wrote:What is so radical about saying that all Mormons have something in common and that all gays have something in common? We gays know that the Mormon Church opposes our agenda. They proved that in California. Having one of them in the White House would not help the gay movement.

Or maybe more specifically is there anything Mitt Romney has done that has been anti-gay? (I don't know. Maybe he does hate gays, but I think it's a little ridiculous to say you don't like him because he's a mormon.)

It's not that I don't like him, it's that I don't trust him. The good news is that a recent poll showed that 25% of all Americans- gay or straight- don't trust a Mormon in the White House. If he gets the nomination, Obama will probably beat him. In fact, I fully expect Obama to beat any of the Republicans because bin-Laden was killed under Obama's watch and the Republicans are in a total state of disarray.

I Wear Pants;816342 wrote:Is marriage a right?

If it is then why do you believe it's okay to restrict that right to only people you approve of?

Sage makes a good point. The people arguing against gay marriage are in 30 years going to look like the assholes standing outside those schools in Alabama to keep the black kids from entering. Don't be on the wrong side of history.

You are misinterpreting my point. If a state in the union decides through a referendum that they do not approve of gay marriage, then that is their right, their will, and their law. If a state says it's ok, then that is their right, will and law. If you don't like the state's law on gay marriage, then don't live there. Very elementary. The fact a majority deems it so should be sufficient...correct???

Is marriage a right? Hhmm...if it's a right, then it's for every person regardless of needs and wants. A right, by definition, can't involve someone else to make it so. Therefore, marriage is not a right.

Is it also the right of the state to decree that blacks should be slaves? That actually happened in this country. Just because the states were in favor of it didn't make it right.

FairwoodKing;816458 wrote:What is so radical about saying that all Mormons have something in common and that all gays have something in common? We gays know that the Mormon Church opposes our agenda. They proved that in California. Having one of them in the White House would not help the gay movement.

Using your logic, President Obama is a racist since he attended a church for 20 years with a racist reverend named Jerimiah Wright. I don't want a president that hates white people, which using your logic, Obama apparently does.

FairwoodKing;816458 wrote:What is so radical about saying that all Mormons have something in common and that all gays have something in common? We gays know that the Mormon Church opposes our agenda. They proved that in California. Having one of them in the White House would not help the gay movement.

I have seen several gay people come out against the polygamy beliefs of some fundamental Mormons. The gay are in favor of one's choice in regards to marriage (as the choice is what they believe)

FairwoodKing;816525 wrote:Is it also the right of the state to decree that blacks should be slaves? That actually happened in this country. Just because the states were in favor of it didn't make it right.

False equivalence. You studyin IWP?

Slavery is not legal in a free society. Except of course slaves to gubmint entitlement programs. Those are legal AND encouraged.

FatHobbit;816429 wrote:I would imagine that one mormon represents all mormons as equally as one homosexual represents all homosexuals.

Or how 19 radical Muslims represent all Muslims.

Or how pedophile priests represent all Catholics.

I'm not a fan of Mitt Romney, but his religion doesn't enter into the equation at all.

You know what I'd like to see, how about an agnostic/atheist single President? Why must a president be married and be a Christian?

tk421;816820 wrote:You know what I'd like to see, how about an agnostic/atheist single President? Why must a president be married and be a Christian?

Wow! Talk about testing the electorate. While it would be interesting to contemplate, we're probably a million years away from that happening.

You could devote a whole thread to this topic and stir up one hell of a shitstorm.

stlouiedipalma;816836 wrote:Wow! Talk about testing the electorate. While it would be interesting to contemplate, we're probably a million years away from that happening.

You could devote a whole thread to this topic and stir up one hell of a shitstorm.

I know, I'd be extremely shocked if such a candidate could come close to even winning the nomination for their party.

BGFalcons82;816728 wrote:False equivalence. You studyin IWP?

Slavery is not legal in a free society. Except of course slaves to gubmint entitlement programs. Those are legal AND encouraged.

I believe FK was pointing out how this country once allowed slavery on a state by state basis, it is not a false equivalence, it is an example from the US history.

Also, if you believe we live in a free society, you are mistaken. If we lived in a truly free society, we would be allowed to indulge in what we wish so long as it doesn't impose or hurt others (i.e. drug use, prostitution, gambling, gay marriage, etc.). We live in a society that is very liberal, but not free.

FairwoodKing;816458 wrote:What is so radical about saying that all Mormons have something in common and that all gays have something in common? We gays know that the Mormon Church opposes our agenda. They proved that in California. Having one of them in the White House would not help the gay movement.

What agenda would that be? That gays are the most self-centered narcissistic folks in the world and should be praised as such? I thought the movement was about tolerance? What else do you want, a cookie while being gay?

What do you want? Seriously. What is your agenda?

LJ;816181 wrote:... I'm not talking about permission. ...You said "government sanctioned marriage" which would include recognition. ...

I am specifically talking about the "permission" part. Marriage does not have to be a privileged act. It he government decides to influence culture by trying to make it advantageous economically for persons to be married it is like them giving candy to a kid if he's willing to get into your car.

The point is that you shouldn't need the "permission" of anyone to be involved in a relationship. It could be no more difficult to go down to the courthouse and submit a simple affidavit that the marriage has occurred, and thus instituting all the current "rights" currently granted, then it is going down to the courthouse to obtain a marriage license.



So do you want them to recognize marriage and all of the legal benefits that come along with it, or do you think every married couple should have to go and file POA's and living wills and trusts?[/QUOTE]

FatHobbit;816429 wrote:I would imagine that one mormon represents all mormons as equally as one homosexual represents all homosexuals.

He has a point Fairwood .. I dont know the Mormon doctoran and Im not gay ,but if you want to break down walls ,lumping whole peoples into a catigory isnt the way . open dialogue and a majority vote should suffice

Fairwood the catholic church opposes gay marriage as does many other churches ...not just the morman church .......My personnel view on the gay marriage thing is .. I think its more political in nature ,rather than moral ... I think many states dont want to let this happen because of estate taxes and insurance issues .. I believe your real fight is with the evil insurance companies and the death tax laws of many states ...The morality police are just a smoke screen in which those entities use to push there own agenda .. If two men want to marry .. I personnally dont care .. Although I dont think that gays have the right to change church doctrin .. But if you find a church that accepts gays ..fine ..I think if you are partners with a loved one for many many years you ought to be able to change death tax laws and you ought to be on the others medical coverage ..even if your not gay ... Its the insurance companies and your state legislature that are your real problems

Southern Baptist get attacked:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/southern-baptists-fall-prey-to-elaborate-gay-marriage-hoax/

Oh no! Someone made a fake web page that tried to tell everyone we aren't intolerant assholes!

Not all Baptists are intolerant. The First Baptist Church of Seattle hosts many gay events. In fact the Seattle Woman's Chorus (a primarily lesbian group) rehearses there.

Of course, this is Seattle, the most tolerant city in the U.S. We have very few hate crimes in the Seattle area.

FairwoodKing;819014 wrote:...

Of course, this is Seattle, the most tolerant city in the U.S. ....

I genuinely would like your opinion regarding a question that was recently posed to me. Do you believe tolerance is the same as acceptance?

Con_Alma;819019 wrote:I genuinely would like your opinion regarding a question that was recently posed to me. Do you believe tolerance is the same as acceptance?

Good question. It's likely that a lot of voters who voted in favor of the all-but-marriage referendum a couple of years ago in Washington are tolerant of us but not necessarily accepting. In other words, they thought they should not deprive gays of their legal rights, but they wouldn't especially want their son or daughter to be gay or lesbian. On the other hand, many of today's young people are both tolerant and accepting because they almost all have gay friends and they understand that we gays are really not much different from anyone else.

I Wear Pants;818700 wrote:Oh no! Someone made a fake web page that tried to tell everyone we aren't intolerant ****s!

I Wear Pants;816450 wrote:Try staying away from stereotyping for a while. I think you'll find it refreshing.