Results 37 to 48 of 110
-
05-10-2012, 10:09 AM #37
So you stated it then; church should regulate marriage. You could have agreed to that belief a dozen posts ago and i would have been done. I disagree that church should regulate marriage so therefore the government has and will continue to finalize any marriage or civil union through a license. A church can't issue a license. Marriage or civil unions affect commerce so therefore it becomes a government issue...marriage or civil union.
It is very naive to think you can go to a church, get married and gain the benefits as in health insurance, death benefits, property rights without government involvement via a license recognizing the relationship. Ultimately every marriage is sanctioned through a state license whether a religious ceremony or a secular ceremony. You can't get away from that fact and still expect all the economic benefits that marriage brings. So since government must be involved in the relationship of marriage due to the commerce effect, it should not discriminate since we, at least, say we don't discriminate in the U.S.
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
-
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
I stated people go to churches for religious ceremony. I am not stating they regulate anything
Ideally I wouldn't have any economic benefits attached to marriage or civil unions. So there would be no need to have government sanction anything if were up to me.
The main issue you're having trouble getting past (that I don't even think you realize) is I don't see a need for government to be involved at all, and you can't help but find away for them to be. Which at the end of the day is pretty much what we debate on every issue anyway.
-
05-10-2012, 11:48 AM #39
-
-
05-10-2012, 02:13 PM #41
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
-
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
And in certain states they already can.
Obama coming out to say he thinks same-sex couples should be able to get married but thinks states have the right to decide doesn't change anything.
I would applaud him for making a bold derision if it was for political purposes.
-
05-10-2012, 03:24 PM #43
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
I haven't seen one account from anyone, right or left, who sees this has a pure political winner. Outside of being honest with his opinion, which everyone knew along that he was for marriage equality, and showing leadership for taking the right position, there is no obvious political win here. Again those who were going to vote for him because of his stance on marriage equality vs. that of Romney will remain in his corner while some of those who were going to vote for him because of other policy opinions may now not because of his verbilizing a marriage equality opinion.
-
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
So he was lying before this when he said he didn't believe in it or is he lying now?
And the political winner or attempt is, trying to get the youth vote that is in support of gay marriage, distraction from the economy and jobs (or lack thereof) and fundraising, which I already linked to.
-
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
Of course not because you're such a homer.
Here's the liberal Wash Post saying what a political risk it was.
As I posted above, Biden forced his hand along with the DEM machine.
It's strictly political and as Darb said, he just lost the election. This link describes how
risky.
From your own MSNBC VIA NYT:
______________________________
As George W. Bush demonstrated in 2004, when his campaign engineered initiatives against gay marriage in a series of swing states, opponents are far more likely to vote on these issues than supporters
________________________________
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47365293.../#.T6wldGjlZTU
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...sWDU_blog.htmlLast edited by AirFlacco; 05-10-2012 at 04:31 PM.
-
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
And your blindness cause you to miss this link yesterday from the DEMs own site - politicol.com.
He was going to announce it before their convention but Biden forced his hand to do it now.
The link says he was concerned about losing conservative religious votes in the swing
states like NC and Ohio. As pointed out above, he's already lost NC after they just shot
down gay marriage by over 30% and he's even with Romney in Ohio.
That's all political guy.
LOL - You truly don't know politics. Everything a president does and says is political and will effect his votes.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76103.htmlLast edited by AirFlacco; 05-10-2012 at 04:40 PM.
-
05-10-2012, 06:19 PM #47
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
This...
+ this....
= this...
http://www.ehow.com/how_2131683_impr...rehension.html
-
Re: Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?
Matter of interpretation Galen.
You said you didn't see where from either side where it's a pure political winner. For
whom? I interpreted that to be for the other side because you have never said anything
negative about him always building him up.
I posted NC just shot down gay marriage. He just lost the NC vote. That's a pure
political winner for the other side and he'll lose Ohio.
This is why your own profession says you have the common sense of a dog coming in
here arguing senseless points while the rest of them are busy saving people.
You've been posting all morning arguing with NC RAVEN when you should have been
helping people, not knocking them down in here or trying to.Last edited by AirFlacco; 05-10-2012 at 08:15 PM.
Bookmarks