Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Things may be a little tense at the Gingrich Thanksgiving dinner
#51
Doc wrote:
> Blacks and Latinos overwhelmingly voted the gay marriage deal down.

That was an interesting lie that caught on in the popular press.

In fact, when you break it down by demographics, older voters pushed prop-8 through with little difference among different racial groups.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/p...myths.html

Beg to differ, Doc

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtrib...source=rss

SACRAMENTO — Some California Republicans are saying they have found a key to expanding their fast-shrinking base, and it lies in the most glaring aspect of the Proposition 8 election results: the minority vote that went overwhelmingly for it.

With seven in 10 blacks and 53 percent of Latinos voting in favor of the ballot measure to ban same-sex marriage, Republicans say they are confident that their common interests with minorities on traditional family and social issues can help forge new political alliances.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_...n_8_(2008)

The following list comprises a detailed, though not exhaustive, account of the demographics voting yes on Prop. 8 from the CNN exit poll:
84% of weekly churchgoers – (32% of electorate);
82% of Republicans – (29% of electorate);
81% of white evangelicals – (17% of electorate);
70% of African Americans – (10% of electorate);
65% of all Protestants - (43% of electorate);
65% of white Protestants – (29% of electorate);
64% of voters w/children in household – (40% of electorate);
64% of Catholics – (30% of electorate);
61% of age 65 and over – (15% of electorate);
60% of married people – (62% of electorate);
59% of suburban dwellers – (51% of electorate);
58% of non-college graduates – (50% of electorate);
53% of Latinos – (18% of electorate);
51% of white men – (31% of electorate). [14]
Reply
#52
Just because most of the people are homophobes doesn't make it right.
Reply
#53
Got a link to that proclamation, Dennis?
Reply
#54
So, homophobia is right?
Reply
#55
Don't ya'll get it? Slippy slope! First you let Them get married, then the next thing you know they pass a law of mandatory same sex marriage. They start teaching homeosexualness in kinddygarden! Guys will have to wear panty hose and women will be required to grow mustaches. What's after that, people demand the right to marry their pets?
Reply
#56
OH yes, let's not forget that "pet" thing, it's a keeper!
Reply
#57
And don't forget brothers and sisters.
Reply
#58
I don't want to marry a pet.

I want a WILD animal!

Grrrrr!
Reply
#59
MacGurl wrote:
[quote=swampy]

I don't understand the need of the Homosexuals to have their unions designated "marriages" under current law.

I'm thinking that for some people, that unless you are gay yourself that you might never be able to empathize with how they feel, to walk a mile in their shoes so to speak. Myself, I can fully feel for them and their situation, how much they just want to have the right to be married to the person they love, just like us straight people. They want the same things "we" do, because they are just like us, but for who they love. I know that if I was wanting to be married to the person of my choice (man or woman), and some outside party was telling me I couldn't because of their belief system (not mine), that it would make me terribly unhappy.

The definition of marriage has already been defined by the courts as one MAN-one WOMAN. It's up to gays to get their own legal definition.

Words are redefined and stretched all of the time. Language is not a static thing - it's fluid and changes with the times. To you marriage might mean man/woman, but it doesn't to all people. There is no ownership of any one word, by any one person or group (unless it's some trademarked doohicky or some such).
Marriage is a legal union in this country - not strictly a religious one, so it is fully within a state's rights to make laws that allow gay marriage.

I think where the gay rights movement meets resistance is in trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Their relationships don't meet the "norm" so they want to change the definition of the norm. Straights push back because they don't want their relationships redefined.

They might not meet the norm for some people, but for a gay person it's completely normal. Setting them aside like they are some sort of outsider seems terribly mean spirited and unloving - what ever happened to live and let live? They aren't inflicting anything on you, or asking any of us to redefine our relationships. What they want it to redefine how the world looks at their relationships. They aren't really hurting you, are they?

I mean this in all sincerity, really I do. I feel BAD for gay people who just want to be allowed to marry the person they love, just like "the rest of us."

Kathy
These are some of the most beautiful words I have ever read.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)