Amendment - Nubblies.net Forums

VOL · 02-26-2004, 12:38 PM

President Bush is asking for a new Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. He (as I'm sure many) feels that marriage is something to be valued between a man and a woman. This is the only other amendment to outlaw something to the American people. The other one was prohibition, and we see where that ended up.

I believe that it's a sacred thing between persons of the opposite sex, not gay couples. I say GO BUSH. Fight hard and get that Amendment passed. By the way Congress is in his favor, seeing as how they are a majority of Republicans.

What are your thoughts?

Mr. Blonde · 02-26-2004, 01:18 PM

I agree with you VOL, i personally think it should be something between two of the opposite sex, but that is our personal opinion. Many gay couples live together already, and personally i do not know what is so special about making the relationship *official* by marriage, but I assume its for the same reason heterosexual couples do. But I personally don't think we should be that close minded about the situation, its really not my place or anybody else's to oppress them.

BarryJive · 02-26-2004, 01:42 PM

Bush is retarded.

from cnn.com
Dubya will go down in history as the, "first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution."

After all the amendments passed to give all citizens equal rights, Bush has decided to do the opposite. Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy issued a statement saying Bush would "go down in history as the first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution." He continued, "We have amended the Constitution only 17 times. ... [It] has often been amended to expand and protect people's rights, never to take away or restrict their rights.” www.cnn.org

Say what you will about gay folks (I personally have no problem with it, what people do in there own homes doesn't bother me.) But where will it end once Bush passes an amendment that restrcts more freedom?

Saint DH · 02-26-2004, 01:43 PM

If the alow gay marriage it will open up pandora's box to all sorts of other shit. Men could start saying that they were born needing two wives, so then they could push to be able to legally marry two women...a guy could say they need to marry an animal, they were born that way...I mean just too much shit could happen.

VOL · 02-26-2004, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dirty Harry:
If the alow gay marriage it will open up pandora's box to all sorts of other shit. Men could start saying that they were born needing two wives, so then they could push to be able to legally marry two women...a guy could say they need to marry an animal, they were born that way...I mean just too much shit could happen.

exactly the hidden point.

Mr. Blonde, we are aware that they live together, what Bush wants to do is call them "social unions" not marriages. We wouldn't be oppressing them too much. They just have no need for a marrige, a marriage is between a man and a woman. That's it

silver and cold · 02-26-2004, 02:16 PM

Well if gayness is such a bad thing remove your ugly avatar!

You know, Im more offended by seeing shit like that than knowing they can get married, hell if they want to get married good for them! I could careless. I dont support it, but I cant say Im against it, it has no effect on me.

And if a man wants to have two wives, and two women agree to mary him like that then, hey what ever floats there boat.

And if he wants to do that stuff with animals, I just ask he does not do it around me.

BarryJive · 02-26-2004, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by silver and cold:
Well if gayness is such a bad thing remove your ugly avatar!

You know, Im more offended by seeing shit like that than knowing they can get married, hell if they want to get married good for them! I could careless. I dont support it, but I cant say Im against it, it has no effect on me.

And if a man wants to have two wives, and two women agree to mary him like that then, hey what ever floats there boat.

And if he wants to do that stuff with animals, I just ask he does not do it around me.

Fuckin' Aye!

Mr. Blonde · 02-26-2004, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by silver and cold: Well if gayness is such a bad thing remove your ugly avatar!

Ha

Pliedes · 02-26-2004, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BarryJive:

Dubya will go down in history as the, "first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution."

Social Security discriminates against people who are not poor. Most people just don't look at it that way. So he's hardly the "first", I mean, it's not like we wrote black people into the constitution as 3/5's a person.

Anyway, I'm against this amendment. If I was president, I'd be taking a totally different course on this issue.

Mr. Blonde · 02-26-2004, 05:37 PM

Call me mr. obvious, but does anyone else think this is to get votes for the upcoming election? I mean, when you think about it, most of america still hasnt completely accepted the gay community yet...let alone marriages...they could support the decision...

Pliedes · 02-26-2004, 05:40 PM

No, it's hardly an attempt for votes. The bible-belt people who want this amendment were already going to vote for Bush, and the liberals who are aginst this were already going to vote for anybody but Bush.

Ugly Bastard · 02-26-2004, 05:51 PM

I like the concept of not allowing gay marriages. And Barry, how is that "taking away our freedoms"? Can gay couples get married now?? Sure, maybe in a few areas of the country, but wholistically, it's hard to take away a freedom that was never there to begin with.

Two guys wanna poke their shit into each others buttholes in their home? Whatever, do what ya gotta do. But, IMO, marriage itself is something between one man and one woman. Not one guy, a chicken, three leftover servings of applesauce and a green butt-fairy from Mars. Err...yeah.

-Ugly Bastard

[ February 26, 2004, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Ugly Bastard ]

BarryJive · 02-26-2004, 05:55 PM

This is just an attempt to give religion more prevalence in the American government. This is hardly an economic issue and totally a moral issue and who the fuck is he to say what anyones morals should be?

BarryJive · 02-26-2004, 05:57 PM

...sorry you posted while was posting UB...right now it is possible for gay people to marry, if the amendment is passed it will no longer be an option hence a freedom has been taken.

Percipere'Chan · 02-26-2004, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by VOL:

...I say GO BUSH. Fight hard...

Yea! More good 'ole fashioned political entertainment. (this will never pass)

Quote:

Originally posted by Dirty Harry:

...Men could start saying that they were born needing two wives.

I have no problem with this.

Quote:

Originally posted by silver and cold:

{to Vol} Well if gayness is such a bad thing remove your ugly avatar!

Congratulations Vol, You just got ProperFucked. And although I'm sure you'd continue to unintentionally shoot yourself in the foot without my help... I am weak willed, and cannot resist the attempt to help you along your way.

Vol, what is the purpose of sex?
-------------------------------------------
S&C, don't worry, they're just enjoying the pro-leisure [hey, that sounds funny if you say it fast] of their Social Union.
-------------------------------------------
-

Quote:

Originally posted by Pliedes:

...I mean, it's not like we wrote black people into the constitution as 3/5's a person.

Yes... We did. Article I, Section 2, Clause 3

Quote:

Originally posted by BarryJive:

Dubya will go down in history as the, "first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution."

btw...

Quote:

Originally posted by Pliedes:

If I was president...
Social Security discriminates against people who are not poor.

I would vote for you to hear you say that to the American people.
-
=
But of course, I cannot leave this post without throwing my own 2cents in for potential banter in the fray.

1 cent). I think homosexuals are looking for a recognition of some spirituality in their union. The term Marriage gives it that *kick*, to many of them the term 'social union' is bland and even, still discriminating.

2 cent). [now for the not-so obvious]. Being based somewhat in the biological, I don't understand the need to go as far as marriage. I don't know any homosexual couples that have *produced* a child. On the other hand, I'm not going to tell a homosexual couple their relationship isn't at all spiritual.

Saint DH · 02-26-2004, 06:28 PM

Alright, since you people apparently are too fucking stupid to understand my point...how would you feel if a child molestor said that he was born needing to marry a 4 year old girl...he was born that way. He can't help it. So we allow him to marry her? What's that you say? Her parents won't allow it? What if he is her parent? Why can't he marry his daughter? I mean, it just opens the floodgates to all kinds of bullshit.

[ February 26, 2004, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: Dirty Harry ]

BarryJive · 02-26-2004, 06:38 PM

You are being ridicuous dirty...a marriage between two consenting adults is a whole hell of a lot different than a pedophile marrying a person he probably plans on raping and abusing. The four year old girl certainly does not count as a consenting adult. You are comparing homosexuals to mental deficients, apples and oranges my friend. Why don't you concentrate on the topic at hand rather than shifting your paranoia to something else.

[ February 26, 2004, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: BarryJive ]

Percipere'Chan · 02-26-2004, 06:42 PM

Dirty,

So is your attempt at making sense. If you want to argue a point, do it. ...the more extremist you get with your examples (ie. the further away you get from the issue at hand), the harder it becomes to take you seriously.

PS. I don't agree or disagree with you. I just simply want two wives. (is that too much to ask? [img]smile.gif[/img] )

fancymeghan · 02-26-2004, 06:42 PM

hey guess what.....love is love no matter what form it takes. as far as i'm concerned...gay marriages are perfectly fine by me.

how does it open all these "floodgates?" i'm not trying to be a bitch, i just don't understand your point on it.

but i don't see how a democracy like the united states would put a ban on the one thing we are trying to promote....love. yea, we spread the message (through hate) with guns and bombs and what not...but that's not the point here.

the point is...how can you rate ones love for another? it can't be denied just because it is a man that loves another man or a woman who loves another woman. you can't say a heterosexual love is more valuable.

love is love.

[ February 26, 2004, 03:44 PM: Message edited by: fancymeghan ]

Percipere'Chan · 02-26-2004, 06:44 PM

fancy,

Be a Bitch. In fact... I'm gonna be a bastard.

Hey Dirty, Where are all these "Floodgates"? Can you teach me how they work? If I'm a good student, will I get to open one someday?

fancymeghan · 02-26-2004, 06:45 PM

i start to hate republicans more and more every day.

Pliedes · 02-26-2004, 06:48 PM

Love can exist without a federally recognized union though.

The issue is not about love, it's about the definition of marriage, that is what we need to be working with here.

Dirty's point, though extreme, is a valid one. If marriage is extended to two males, what is the reasoning for allowing that? Come up with some man who wants to marry his 10 year old daughter, or his horse (as a man in Montana wanted).

Definition people, that's what the issue is about. So tell us what you think the definition of marriage is.

Dictionary.com says:
"The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife."

Saint DH · 02-26-2004, 06:49 PM

Hey Chan, have you ever had a knife stuck in the back of your head? Just wondering.

fancymeghan · 02-26-2004, 06:50 PM

how would you feel if you couldn't marry the one person that you are in love with?

Saint DH · 02-26-2004, 06:51 PM

I'm not gay, so I can. I found the solution.

02-26-2004, 12:38 PM	#1 (permalink)
VOL Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: there Posts: 2,305 Internets: -205	President Bush is asking for a new Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. He (as I'm sure many) feels that marriage is something to be valued between a man and a woman. This is the only other amendment to outlaw something to the American people. The other one was prohibition, and we see where that ended up. I believe that it's a sacred thing between persons of the opposite sex, not gay couples. I say GO BUSH. Fight hard and get that Amendment passed. By the way Congress is in his favor, seeing as how they are a majority of Republicans. What are your thoughts?
	~ductor ab grandis divinitus~ CDXXVII

02-26-2004, 01:18 PM	#2 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 284106	I agree with you VOL, i personally think it should be something between two of the opposite sex, but that is our personal opinion. Many gay couples live together already, and personally i do not know what is so special about making the relationship official by marriage, but I assume its for the same reason heterosexual couples do. But I personally don't think we should be that close minded about the situation, its really not my place or anybody else's to oppress them.
	Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behavior and information processing. ― Terence McKenna

02-26-2004, 01:42 PM	#3 (permalink)
BarryJive Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bloomington Posts: 358 Internets: 44	Bush is retarded. from cnn.com Dubya will go down in history as the, "first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution." After all the amendments passed to give all citizens equal rights, Bush has decided to do the opposite. Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy issued a statement saying Bush would "go down in history as the first president to try to write discrimination back into the Constitution." He continued, "We have amended the Constitution only 17 times. ... [It] has often been amended to expand and protect people's rights, never to take away or restrict their rights.” www.cnn.org Say what you will about gay folks (I personally have no problem with it, what people do in there own homes doesn't bother me.) But where will it end once Bush passes an amendment that restrcts more freedom?
	I don't mean to brag, I don't mean to boast, but I'm intercontinental when I eat french toast.

02-26-2004, 02:16 PM	#6 (permalink)
silver and cold Ish... Join Date: May 2003 Location: this nowhere Posts: 1,680 Internets: 10	Well if gayness is such a bad thing remove your ugly avatar! You know, Im more offended by seeing shit like that than knowing they can get married, hell if they want to get married good for them! I could careless. I dont support it, but I cant say Im against it, it has no effect on me. And if a man wants to have two wives, and two women agree to mary him like that then, hey what ever floats there boat. And if he wants to do that stuff with animals, I just ask he does not do it around me.
	the killer in me is the killer in you.

02-26-2004, 05:37 PM	#10 (permalink)
Mr. Blonde Spice Master Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 17,969 Internets: 284106	Call me mr. obvious, but does anyone else think this is to get votes for the upcoming election? I mean, when you think about it, most of america still hasnt completely accepted the gay community yet...let alone marriages...they could support the decision...
	Psychedelics are illegal not because a loving government is concerned that you may jump out of a third story window. Psychedelics are illegal because they dissolve opinion structures and culturally laid down models of behavior and information processing. ― Terence McKenna

02-26-2004, 01:43 PM	#4 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,147 Internets: 284753	If the alow gay marriage it will open up pandora's box to all sorts of other shit. Men could start saying that they were born needing two wives, so then they could push to be able to legally marry two women...a guy could say they need to marry an animal, they were born that way...I mean just too much shit could happen.

02-26-2004, 05:40 PM	#11 (permalink)
Pliedes Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 4,594 Internets: 1608	No, it's hardly an attempt for votes. The bible-belt people who want this amendment were already going to vote for Bush, and the liberals who are aginst this were already going to vote for anybody but Bush.

02-26-2004, 05:51 PM	#12 (permalink)
Ugly Bastard Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 13,643 Internets: 247330	I like the concept of not allowing gay marriages. And Barry, how is that "taking away our freedoms"? Can gay couples get married now?? Sure, maybe in a few areas of the country, but wholistically, it's hard to take away a freedom that was never there to begin with. Two guys wanna poke their shit into each others buttholes in their home? Whatever, do what ya gotta do. But, IMO, marriage itself is something between one man and one woman. Not one guy, a chicken, three leftover servings of applesauce and a green butt-fairy from Mars. Err...yeah. -Ugly Bastard [ February 26, 2004, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Ugly Bastard ]

02-26-2004, 05:55 PM	#13 (permalink)
BarryJive Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bloomington Posts: 358 Internets: 44	This is just an attempt to give religion more prevalence in the American government. This is hardly an economic issue and totally a moral issue and who the fuck is he to say what anyones morals should be?
	I don't mean to brag, I don't mean to boast, but I'm intercontinental when I eat french toast.

02-26-2004, 05:57 PM	#14 (permalink)
BarryJive Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bloomington Posts: 358 Internets: 44	...sorry you posted while was posting UB...right now it is possible for gay people to marry, if the amendment is passed it will no longer be an option hence a freedom has been taken.
	I don't mean to brag, I don't mean to boast, but I'm intercontinental when I eat french toast.

02-26-2004, 06:28 PM	#16 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,147 Internets: 284753	Alright, since you people apparently are too fucking stupid to understand my point...how would you feel if a child molestor said that he was born needing to marry a 4 year old girl...he was born that way. He can't help it. So we allow him to marry her? What's that you say? Her parents won't allow it? What if he is her parent? Why can't he marry his daughter? I mean, it just opens the floodgates to all kinds of bullshit. [ February 26, 2004, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: Dirty Harry ]

02-26-2004, 06:38 PM	#17 (permalink)
BarryJive Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bloomington Posts: 358 Internets: 44	You are being ridicuous dirty...a marriage between two consenting adults is a whole hell of a lot different than a pedophile marrying a person he probably plans on raping and abusing. The four year old girl certainly does not count as a consenting adult. You are comparing homosexuals to mental deficients, apples and oranges my friend. Why don't you concentrate on the topic at hand rather than shifting your paranoia to something else. [ February 26, 2004, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: BarryJive ]
	I don't mean to brag, I don't mean to boast, but I'm intercontinental when I eat french toast.

02-26-2004, 06:42 PM	#18 (permalink)
Percipere'Chan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: My Machine Posts: 460 Internets: -238	Dirty, So is your attempt at making sense. If you want to argue a point, do it. ...the more extremist you get with your examples (ie. the further away you get from the issue at hand), the harder it becomes to take you seriously. PS. I don't agree or disagree with you. I just simply want two wives. (is that too much to ask? [img]smile.gif[/img] )
	Dead, death, grim on a pale horse, empty, hollow, inanimate, fataled, black curtained, annihilated.

02-26-2004, 06:42 PM	#19 (permalink)
fancymeghan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: indiana. Posts: 504 Internets: 306	hey guess what.....love is love no matter what form it takes. as far as i'm concerned...gay marriages are perfectly fine by me. how does it open all these "floodgates?" i'm not trying to be a bitch, i just don't understand your point on it. but i don't see how a democracy like the united states would put a ban on the one thing we are trying to promote....love. yea, we spread the message (through hate) with guns and bombs and what not...but that's not the point here. the point is...how can you rate ones love for another? it can't be denied just because it is a man that loves another man or a woman who loves another woman. you can't say a heterosexual love is more valuable. love is love. [ February 26, 2004, 03:44 PM: Message edited by: fancymeghan ]

02-26-2004, 06:44 PM	#20 (permalink)
Percipere'Chan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: My Machine Posts: 460 Internets: -238	fancy, Be a Bitch. In fact... I'm gonna be a bastard. Hey Dirty, Where are all these "Floodgates"? Can you teach me how they work? If I'm a good student, will I get to open one someday?
	Dead, death, grim on a pale horse, empty, hollow, inanimate, fataled, black curtained, annihilated.

02-26-2004, 06:45 PM	#21 (permalink)
fancymeghan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: indiana. Posts: 504 Internets: 306	i start to hate republicans more and more every day.

02-26-2004, 06:48 PM	#22 (permalink)
Pliedes Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 4,594 Internets: 1608	Love can exist without a federally recognized union though. The issue is not about love, it's about the definition of marriage, that is what we need to be working with here. Dirty's point, though extreme, is a valid one. If marriage is extended to two males, what is the reasoning for allowing that? Come up with some man who wants to marry his 10 year old daughter, or his horse (as a man in Montana wanted). Definition people, that's what the issue is about. So tell us what you think the definition of marriage is. Dictionary.com says: "The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife."

02-26-2004, 06:49 PM	#23 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,147 Internets: 284753	Hey Chan, have you ever had a knife stuck in the back of your head? Just wondering.

02-26-2004, 06:50 PM	#24 (permalink)
fancymeghan Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: indiana. Posts: 504 Internets: 306	how would you feel if you couldn't marry the one person that you are in love with?

02-26-2004, 06:51 PM	#25 (permalink)
Saint DH Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 6,147 Internets: 284753	I'm not gay, so I can. I found the solution.