Vermont Legalizes Gay Marriage

[jeremyboycool]

Vermont Legalizes Gay Marriage, Overrides Governor's Veto

Vermont, which invented civil unions, on Tuesday became a pioneer again as the first state to legalize gay marriage through a legislature's vote, suggesting growing popular acceptance of the idea.

The House barely achieved the votes necessary to override Gov. Jim Douglas' veto of a bill that will allow gays and lesbians to marry beginning September 1. Four states now have same-sex marriage laws and other states soon could follow suit.

Bills to allow same-sex marriage are currently before lawmakers in New Hampshire, Maine, New York and New Jersey. The three other states that currently allow same-sex marriage _ Connecticut, Massachusetts and Iowa _ each moved to do so through the courts, not legislatures.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/0 ... 84034.html

Also from the Washington post.

Vermont legislators overrode Republican Gov. Jim Douglas's veto of a gay marriage bill, making the state the fourth in the country to legalize same-sex nuptials.

The D.C. Council unanimously approved legislation that would recognize the nuptials of gay couples performed in other states, paving the way for a District gay marriage law, which Catania plans to introduce this year.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 04166.html

It just a matter of time of course, before this all over and liberty triumphs (which of course I mean gays get some of their rights back). Still, it is depressing to think of the stupidity of it all.

[Brent]

Another check mark towards America's doom.

[JawZ]

-

[jeremyboycool]

Another check mark towards America's doom.

One of these days, when you stop hating yourself, you are going to be glad these people fought this battle for you.

[Humboldt]

Another check mark towards America's doom.

Jesus Christ, what a crock of ignorance.

[Brk]

While I'm morally opposed to gay marriage, government should not be involved with marriage whatsoever; it should neither allowed to be legal or illegal. No license, no blood test, none of the bureaucratic nonsense.

If two people or any stripe want to get married, let them do it and bear whatever consequences arise on their own terms.

[jeremyboycool]

While I'm morally opposed to gay marriage, government should not be involved with marriage whatsoever; it should neither allowed to be legal or illegal. No license, no blood test, none of the bureaucratic nonsense.

If two people or any stripe want to get married, let them do it and bear whatever consequences arise on their own terms.

I appreciate the fact that you respect separation of church and state. But on what moral grounds are you opposed to gay marriage?

[Paft]

Good for Vermont.

[Brent]

Good for Vermont.

Bad for America

[jeremyboycool]

Bad for America

How so?

[JawZ]

-

[YARDofSTUF]

Bad for America

No worse than your religion.

[Sava700]

Bad for America

so you don't like lesbians? You wouldn't sit there and watch two or more go at it?

[Roody]

so you don't like lesbians? You wouldn't sit there and watch two or more go at it?

Perhaps this is his theory?

[Leatherneck]

I have finally gained the wisdom of age....

[Prey521]

While I'm morally opposed to gay marriage, government should not be involved with marriage whatsoever; it should neither allowed to be legal or illegal. No license, no blood test, none of the bureaucratic nonsense.

If two people or any stripe want to get married, let them do it and bear whatever consequences arise on their own terms.

[jeremyboycool]

IMO, I believe you already know the answer. IMO, I believe that he finds homosexuality to be disgusting and the act, a sin. IMO, he probably believes that the acceptance of gay marriage represents the diminishing of his closely held religious belief systems. Many would argue that the foundation of our governmental framework was based upon Christian law/beliefs.

Brent is free to think it's disgusting and a sin. Where he will meet strong opposition is when he seeks to have his beliefs legislated as restrictions against other free men and women.

"IMO, I believe you already know the answer. IMO, I believe that he finds homosexuality to be disgusting and the act, a sin."

I was not really inquiring into why Brent is a bigot. I want to know exactly how homosexuality is bad for America. It is only natural that when someone says something so demeaning and hurtful that they, at the very least, explain themselves.

" IMO, he probably believes that the acceptance of gay marriage represents the diminishing of his closely held religious belief systems. Many would argue that the foundation of our governmental framework was based upon Christian law/beliefs."

I don't know what Brent's reasoning is, as he has not said. This, however, is a straw man argument. I want specifics. But then I really was not asking you; I was asking Brent. But if you have something to say then go for it.

"Brent is free to think it's disgusting and a sin."

He is certainly free to express his opinions and so am I.

"Where he will meet strong opposition is when he seeks to have his beliefs legislated as restrictions against other free men and women."

I appreciate the sentiments, but they don't seem to be meeting a very strong opposition. They certainly did not have much problem banning gay marriage and suppressing our rights via that route.

[JawZ]

-

[Leatherneck]

I was not really inquiring into why Brent is a bigot. I want to know exactly how homosexuality is bad for America. It is only natural that when someone says something so demeaning and hurtful that they, at the very least, explain themselves.

Let me give you an honest example of when it "can" be at the least disruptive.

In the military it can be a very touchy subject and one that can cause uneasiness regardless of what is right, moral, accepted, etc... If for any reason whatsoever it creates tension, doubt, uncomfortable feelings, etc.. it may jeopardize attention or create a situation that is not conducive to completing the task at hand. Is it right? Maybe not but it's real.

I personally don't have any negative feelings towards the choices that private citizens make as long as you are not jeopardizing the safety and well being of myself and my family, but I also don't like being told that I am a bigot or intolerant because of my beliefs. Are we not all free thinkers?

[jeremyboycool]

Jerry, who cares? ANY explanation into his bigotry will never be good enough. You already know why he is the way he is so no further info is needed. You just want to try and "out" him as a bigot because he's pissed you off. What will specifics do at this point? Make him see the light? lulz!!!

If you want to investigate how homosexuality is bad for America by questioning Brent....well....go for it I guess but I think you're wasting your time.

As for demeaning and hurtful, some of that is your own doing because you allow it to be.

"Jerry, who cares?"

You may not realize it, but this type of prejudice has had and still does have a huge impact on my life and the lives of many others.

"ANY explanation into his bigotry will never be good enough. You already know why he is the way he is so no further info is needed."

The best way to fight prejudice is to stimulate thought. You can stimulate thought via question and debate. You ask the question how and it is a natural reaction for the individual to ponder the answer. At the very least this will get people thinking. Then if they answer, you response and this creates debate; debate is a great way to educate yourself and others.

"You just want to try and "out" him as a bigot because he's pissed you off. What will specifics do at this point? Make him see the light? lulz!!!"

You think I simply want to "out" Brent? The dude has already "outed" himself; he needs no help with that. But, at any rate, my question is legitimate and relevant.

"As for demeaning and hurtful, some of that is your own doing because you allow it to be."

The fact that prejudice against homosexuals is so prevalent in our society is not my fault. In fact by simply existing I undermined that prejudice. However, when you do not speak out against prejudice, in the face of prejudice, then you "allow it to be". Support the right of expression; I agree with that but that does not mean that you simply sit idly by and allow prejudice to run rampant.

[jeremyboycool]

Let me give you an honest example of when it "can" be at the least disruptive.

In the military it can be a very touchy subject and one that can cause uneasiness regardless of what is right, moral, accepted, etc... If for any reason whatsoever it creates tension, doubt, uncomfortable feelings, etc.. it may jeopardize attention or create a situation that is not conducive to completing the task at hand. Is it right? Maybe not but it's real.

I personally don't have any negative feelings towards the choices that private citizens make as long as you are not jeopardizing the safety and well being of myself and my family, but I also don't like being told that I am a bigot or intolerant because of my beliefs. Are we not all free thinkers?

"Let me give you an honest example of when it "can" be at the least disruptive.

In the military it can be a very touchy subject and one that can cause uneasiness regardless of what is right, moral, accepted, etc... If for any reason whatsoever it creates tension, doubt, uncomfortable feelings, etc.. it may jeopardize attention or create a situation that is not conducive to completing the task at hand. Is it right? Maybe not but it's real. "

"Uneasiness" is not a justifiable reason to suppress people and simply because tough military personnel turn into pussies around a homo that does not mean America will collapse. I mean these people are expected to possibly kill and yet they can't handle homosexuality? If that is the case then the military needs to work on discipline. Beside the "uneasiness" does not stem from homosexuals themselves. It sounds more like a personal problem to me.

"I personally don't have any negative feelings towards the choices that private citizens make as long as you are not jeopardizing the safety and well being of myself and my family, but I also don't like being told that I am a bigot or intolerant because of my beliefs. Are we not all free thinkers?"

"I also don't like being told that I am a bigot or intolerant because of my beliefs"

I can certainty understand that.

"Are we not all free thinkers?"

Think and express what you want but expect me to do the same. Is that not fair?

[Shinobi]

You have every right to speak out against homos...

Great showing of ignorance right there.. for someone who always talks about the government taking away all Americans rights away , seems like you, yourself is walking tall with the radical right?

I for one, am glad the Vermont legalized gay marriage. I always find it funny that people get all "freaked out" over this.. and it "doesn't even affect them".

[Leatherneck]

"Let me give you an honest example of when it "can" be at the least disruptive.

In the military it can be a very touchy subject and one that can cause uneasiness regardless of what is right, moral, accepted, etc... If for any reason whatsoever it creates tension, doubt, uncomfortable feelings, etc.. it may jeopardize attention or create a situation that is not conducive to completing the task at hand. Is it right? Maybe not but it's real. "

"Uneasiness" is not a justifiable reason to suppress people and simply because tough military personnel turn into pussies around a homo that does not mean America will collapse. I mean these people are expected to possibly kill and yet they can't handle homosexuality? If that is the case then the military needs to work on discipline. Beside the "uneasiness" does not stem from homosexuals themselves. It sounds more like a personal problem to me.

"I personally don't have any negative feelings towards the choices that private citizens make as long as you are not jeopardizing the safety and well being of myself and my family, but I also don't like being told that I am a bigot or intolerant because of my beliefs. Are we not all free thinkers?"

"I also don't like being told that I am a bigot or intolerant because of my beliefs"

I can certainty understand that.

"Are we not all free thinkers?"

Think and express what you want but expect me to do the same. Is that not fair?

I understand your position, thought & feelings but please don't presume to know what affect it has on many military folks. I got a pretty good idea after 20+ years. I never claimed that uneasiness was justifiable but rather a "real" situation to deal with so it does not matter one bit how, where or why the uneasiness is there, it just is. I can say that over the last few years in the Corps I saw a more accepting attitude of homosexuality. Probably due to societal behavior and views as well as forced doctrine from suits.

On a lighter note with a twist of jest, your statement,
"...and simply because tough military personnel turn into pussies around a homo"
That's just wishful thinking!

[JawZ]

-

[JawZ]

-

[jeremyboycool]

I understand your position, thought & feelings but please don't presume to know what affect it has on many military folks. I got a pretty good idea after 20+ years. I never claimed that uneasiness was justifiable but rather a "real" situation to deal with so it does not matter one bit how, where or why the uneasiness is there, it just is. I can say that over the last few years in the Corps I saw a more accepting attitude of homosexuality. Probably due to societal behavior and views as well as forced doctrine from suits.

On a lighter note with a twist of jest, your statement,
"...and simply because tough military personnel turn into pussies around a homo"
That's just wishful thinking!

"I understand your position, thought & feelings but please don't presume to know what affect it has on many military folks. I got a pretty good idea after 20+ years. I never claimed that uneasiness was justifiable but rather a "real" situation to deal with so it does not matter one bit how, where or why the uneasiness is there, it just is."

I may not have your experience in the military, however, you don't have my experience as a homosexual. Homosexuality in and of itself is harmless and this "uneasiness" you talk about stems not form the homosexuals themselves. People are uneasy around homosexuals usually because they have a problem with it themselves. This is generally referred to as homophobia, which is bred in and perpetuated via prejudice and ignorance. The problem really is not homosexuality, it is homophobia; at least in my opinion.

"I never claimed that uneasiness was justifiable but rather a "real" situation to deal with so it does not matter one bit how, where or why the uneasiness is there, it just is."

I agree, it is a real situation and one that is very destructive to the homosexuals themselves. But I feel it is important to understand the how, where, and why. Only by understanding a problem can we start to resolve it.

"I can say that over the last few years in the Corps I saw a more accepting attitude of homosexuality. Probably due to societal behavior and views as well as forced doctrine from suits."

I am sure the view is being pushed. I would also think that originally "homophobia" was predominantly (and perhaps, for the time being, still is) the asserted view.


"On a lighter note with a twist of jest, your statement,
"...and simply because tough military personnel turn into pussies around a homo"
That's just wishful thinking! "

[Gixxer]

Another check mark towards America's doom.

it's funny you say things like this. i don't see any gay guys/gals on here saying, "hey you ever **** in a walmart bag"? so if guys/gals want to get married to each other and you say that it is a step toward "doom", then what are we to think about the straight guys boasting about shitting in a walmart bag?

[jeremyboycool]

Did you consider that making this thread also invites bigotry....even your own bigotry? At some point, you'll have to realize that a bit of tolerance on Brent's point of view is also necessary to advance the debate past the barriers that each of us has built over time.

Which brings me to my last point J, time. You've been here a long time and know that Brent really hasn't changed much over the course of that period. I'm not going to insult him and say that he is incapable of changing his views but you should know by now what his position is.

So if you are going to invite prejudice and bigotry, you should at least be tolerant of the opposition's viewpoints.

UOD, I don't think you quite understand me. My question was not solely intended for Brent. I knew he was unlikely to answer and if he did it would, on his part, mostly be unfruitful. It is just simply important to ask "how?" for no other reason then to invoke thought.

I bet you that even Brent thought about how and just the mere fact that he thought about it meant he became a little smarter. That's how it is done, one baby step at a time.

[JawZ]

-

[JawZ]

-

[jeremyboycool]

I don't think you understand me as well but really, do we need to understand each other?

You see J, I don't normally think about gays. It's not my programming. I really only give it a thought when it is mentioned in the news or in a discussion as it is now. I just think about people. When the thoughts are sexual, I think about hot babes, mainly of the blonde persuasion. What I'm getting at is that I don't walk around with a pro or anti gay agenda. I'm completely oblivious to gay culture. But I don't need to know anything other than you as a human being to respect your inalienable rights.

So no, I don't understand you and really have no need to. You're human.

Are heterosexuals on your radar throughout the day? Do you think about what we're thinking? Do you think that we spend time on insidious plots against you? Don't take offense, I'm just asking.

"You see J, I don't normally think about gays. It's not my programming. I really only give it a thought when it is mentioned in the news or in a discussion as it is now. I just think about people. When the thoughts are sexual, I think about hot babes, mainly of the blonde persuasion. What I'm getting at is that I don't walk around with a pro or anti gay agenda. I'm completely oblivious to gay culture. But I don't need to know anything other than you as a human being to respect your inalienable rights. "

I don't think you quite get what it means to be a minority. I would gladly go about my own business and not give it a second thought. Unfortunately, I do not enjoy the same luxury you do.

"Are heterosexuals on your radar throughout the day? Do you think about what we're thinking? Do you think that we spend time on insidious plots against you? Don't take offense, I'm just asking."

I don't think in terms of "heterosexuals". I do, however, think about the nature of prejudice. It is constantly being shoved in my face and has caused me personally a great deal of grief and compromised my position in life. It is, only natural that I give it some thought. And, no, I don't think anyone is plotting against me. I do think some people are prejudice though and that this effects us as a whole.

[jeremyboycool]

I do have one question for you J....


If you never told anyone you were gay and were never caught in a homosexual act...would people be able to tell that you were gay?

I am sorry, but I am not going to discuss my "mannerisms". But, if you have something to say I'll listen.

[JawZ]

--

[JawZ]

-

[jeremyboycool]

How is being a human a minority?

How do you qualify someone as being prejudice? What is the process by which you qualify someone as being prejudice?

"How is being a human a minority? "

Not all humans are treated as equals.


"How do you qualify someone as being prejudice? What is the process by which you qualify someone as being prejudice?"

When you start unjustly outlawing people's rights then I think that's a good indicator.

[YARDofSTUF]

Great showing of ignorance right there.. for someone who always talks about the government taking away all Americans rights away , seems like you, yourself is walking tall with the radical right?

I for one, am glad the Vermont legalized gay marriage. I always find it funny that people get all "freaked out" over this.. and it "doesn't even affect them".

You don't seem to understand UOD's point.

[Shinobi]

You don't seem to understand UOD's point.

I'll keep reading the downward spiral, thanks.

[YARDofSTUF]

... ok.

[CiscoKid]

it's funny you say things like this. i don't see any gay guys/gals on here saying, "hey you ever **** in a walmart bag"? so if guys/gals want to get married to each other and you say that it is a step toward "doom", then what are we to think about the straight guys boasting about shitting in a walmart bag?

I say Brent harbors gay tendencies...he did admit once to being more interested in the males in a porn then the chicks...I wonder f he's be interested in the chick with d*cks...

[JawZ]

-