Gop going after gay marriage again

[coopturn]

I read your posts before I responded. Calling me lazy is an ad hominem attack, but that must be what you have.

Then my response was not passive aggressive as I had already given my thought on that.

 

[Chrysippus]

Then my response was not passive aggressive as I had already given my thought on that.

Brilliant, let's move on.

 

[Industrialsize]

Yeah.

You believe it isn't happening.

 

[coopturn]

You believe it isn't happening.

I didn't say that. It's happening in some places in which the GOP is in control and it is not happening in some places where the GOP is in control. It isn't happening in the state where I live and we have a Republican governor.

 

[Industrialsize]

I didn't say that. It's happening in some places in which the GOP is in control and it is not happening in some places where the GOP is in control. It isn't happening in the state where I live and we have a Republican governor.

But the one place it is NOT happening is where there are Democrats in control.

 

[TexanStar]

I didn't say that. It's happening in some places in which the GOP is in control and it is not happening in some places where the GOP is in control. It isn't happening in the state where I live and we have a Republican governor.

So? You're in a democratic stronghold and have a Democratic legislature.

Are you trying to say that the GOP isn't making attempts to subvert gay rights because your blue state governor isn't?

Do you want me to find an example of a Republican official supporting a tax increase and then use that to say that cutting taxes is not a primary platform issue of the GOP?

 

[Industrialsize]

I didn't say that. It's happening in some places in which the GOP is in control and it is not happening in some places where the GOP is in control. It isn't happening in the state where I live and we have a Republican governor.

You're getting a Kennedy as Governor in 2018.

 

[Klingsor]

You're getting a Kennedy as Governor in 2018.

A budget would be nice, too. I want a budget.

 

[coopturn]

You're getting a Kennedy as Governor in 2018.

I hope not. That's all we need, another member of a corrupt political dynasty. He first needs to get past an already crowded field of Democrats that includes J. B. Pritzker, who I believe stands a better chance in the primary.

 

[umdoistressilvaquatro]

So? You're in a democratic stronghold and have a Democratic legislature.

Are you trying to say that the GOP isn't making attempts to subvert gay rights because your blue state governor isn't?

I like how he just ignores questions when you hit the weak points of his worldview.

 

[deleted15807]

I like how he just ignores questions when you hit the weak points of his worldview.

Whether it is intentional or not I don't know but I do know when the ideology runs into objective reality they bail out. It's really a waste of precious time to discuss anything with them.

 

[TexanStar]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...end_spousal_benefits_to_same_sex_couples.html

Here we go again.

Texas has now decided that marriage and all the benefits which are tied to marriage are different things, so just because you can get a license to be married if you're gay doesn't mean that you are entitled to the rights & benefits associated to being married.

 

[deleted37010]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...end_spousal_benefits_to_same_sex_couples.html

Here we go again.

Texas has now decided that marriage and all the benefits which are tied to marriage are different things, so just because you can get a license to be married if you're gay doesn't mean that you are entitled to the rights & benefits associated to being married.

“The Supreme Court held … that the Constitution requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriages to the same extent that they license and recognize opposite-sex marriages,” Justice Jeff Boyd wrote Friday, “But it did not hold that states must provide the same publicly funded benefits to all married persons.”
http://projects.statesman.com/documents/?doc=3882885-TSC-Marriage-Ruling

a new separate but equal?

 

[Klingsor]

a new separate but equal?

I'm thinking stupid but evil.

 

[Klingsor]

a new separate but equal?

I'm thinking stupid but evil.

All I can say is, the eventual Supreme Court decision had better include the word "assholes" multiple times.

 

[StormfrontFL]

“The Supreme Court held … that the Constitution requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriages to the same extent that they license and recognize opposite-sex marriages,” Justice Jeff Boyd wrote Friday, “But it did not hold that states must provide the same publicly funded benefits to all married persons.”
http://projects.statesman.com/documents/?doc=3882885-TSC-Marriage-Ruling

a new separate but equal?

Here's something to ask all those who advocate for letting the states decide this...

What's to stop them from next deciding that the same applies to interracial couples? Since conservatives seem to worry so often about a "slippery slope" what stops this?

Another thing, name one reason to deny same sex marriages without using a Bible or religious beliefs.