Gays have at this time the very same options as to who to "marry" that I have. The field is PERFECTLY level... The majority of the plebiscite does not want, need or desire "other" or "added" options.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:52 AM, plainolamerican <[email protected] > wrote: > "Additional Rights & > Privileges".....That is exactly what this secularist Gay movement is > asking > for. > --- > hogwash > > what additional rights or privies are they asking for? > > On Feb 14, 10:35 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > No, they are asking for additional rights and privileges, more than you > > or I have. I don't get how you can support "Additional Rights & > > Privileges".....That is exactly what this secularist Gay movement is > asking > > for. > > > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:33 AM, plainolamerican < > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > Lets just let them emasculate you so you can fit the new > > > definition you so readily accept and approve > > > ---- > > > marriage is between two people ... not just a man and a woman > > > > > accept it or not ... but don't impede on the rights of others > > > > > On Feb 13, 6:57 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Well, Plainol, Lets just let them emasculate you so you can fit the > new > > > > definition you so readily accept and approve. After all... all it > takes > > > to > > > > satisfy you is an adjustment to the dicktlessionary. > > > > > > The same thing is what is wrong with the entire federal > constitutional > > > > stance..or lack of one.. if the clause or amendment doesn't suit > either > > > the > > > > Executive, legislative or Judicial Branches they simply "redefine" > it. > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:53 PM, plainolamerican > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > MARRIAGE is a GENDER specific word: > > > > > --- > > > > > With several countries revising their marriage laws to recognize > same- > > > > > sex couples in the 21st century, all major English dictionaries > have > > > > > revised their definition of the word marriage to either drop gender > > > > > specifications or supplement them with secondary definitions to > > > > > include gender-neutral language or explicit recognition of same-sex > > > > > unions. The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized same-sex > marriage > > > > > since 2000. > > > > > > > On Feb 13, 1:57 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > And it is just fine in those places... they have CHANGED or > ADDED to > > > the > > > > > > permit an EXPANSION of who is allowed to "marry". > > > > > > > > As to the religious... MARRIAGE is a GENDER specific word: > > > > > > > > The modern English word "marriage" derives from Middle > > > > > > English<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_English> > > > > > > *mariage*, which first appears in 1250–1300 C.E. This in turn is > > > derived > > > > > > fromOld French <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_French> > *marier* > > > (to > > > > > > marry) and ultimately Latin <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin> > > > > > > *marītāre* meaning > > > > > > to provide with a husband or wife and *marītāri* meaning to get > > > married. > > > > > > (The adjective *marīt-us -a, -um* meaning matrimonial or nuptial > > > could > > > > > also > > > > > > be used in the masculine form as a noun for "husband" and in the > > > feminine > > > > > > form for "wife."[13]< > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage#cite_note-OED_marriage-12> > > > > > > The > > > > > > related English word "matrimony" derives from the Old French > word * > > > > > > matremoine* which appears around 1300 C.E. and ultimately derives > > > from > > > > > > Latin *mātrimōnium* which combines the two concepts *mater* > meaning > > > > > > "mother<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother>" > > > > > > and the suffix -*monium*signifying "action, state, or condition." > > > > > > > > It has definite religious connotations.... If they were to simply > > > ask for > > > > > > "UNIONS" the religious would have next to no problem with it. > > > > > > > > rmit allows.... > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > not in New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, > and New > > > > > > > Hampshire > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > most polls showing that a majority of Americans now support > full > > > > > > > marriage rights for all Americans > > > > > > > > > the religious are losing this discrimination one state at a > tiime > > > > > > > > > On Feb 13, 1:31 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > two people of the same gender is more than the law/permit > > > allows.... > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:37 AM, plainolamerican < > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > What "They" seek, is > > > > > > > > > additional rights, to marry within their gender. > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > two people getting married is not an additional right > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 13, 9:03 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Good Morning PlainOl, > > > > > > > > > > > > "They" can get married now, just like you and I can. > To > > > any > > > > > man or > > > > > > > > > woman > > > > > > > > > > that they so choose to marry, just like you or I can. > What > > > > > "They" > > > > > > > seek, > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > additional rights, to marry within their gender. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 9:48 AM, plainolamerican > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > what they seek, is "Additional Rights And Privileges" > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > i think they're just looking to get legally married by > the > > > > > state > > > > > > > like > > > > > > > > > > > heteros. What is special about that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2:45 pm, Keith In Tampa < > [email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly Mark. The secularist Gay Militant Movement > in > > > this > > > > > > > Nation > > > > > > > > > gets > > > > > > > > > > > > that provervial "Deer Caught In The Headlights" look > > > when > > > > > they > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > confronted with this one absolute. It fucks up their > > > whole > > > > > > > spiel, > > > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > is pointed out that what they seek, is "Additional > > > Rights And > > > > > > > > > Privileges" > > > > > > > > > > > > above the average American. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 3:39 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE < > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tommy, What is there about marriage that is unequal > > > now? > > > > > Every > > > > > > > > > > > > > individual has the same options. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 9:48 am, Tommy News < > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks to Romney, There's No “Vegas of Gay > Marriage” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By Andrew Harmon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WASHINGTON, D.C. — Mitt Romney came out swinging > > > against > > > > > > > marriage > > > > > > > > > > > > > > equality during his Friday CPAC address, > claiming he > > > > > > > “prevented > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Massachusetts from becoming the Las Vegas of gay > > > > > marriage.” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That zinger, accompanied by reiterated pledges to > > > defend > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > Defense > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Marriage Act and support a federal marriage > > > amendment, > > > > > > > showed > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > side of Romney eager for social conservative > cred — > > > this > > > > > one > > > > > > > > > month > > > > > > > > > > > > > > after he told a New Hampshire debate audience > that > > > “if > > > > > > > people are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > looking for someone who will discriminate against > > > gays or > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > in any > > > > > > > > > > > > > > way try and suggest that people that have > different > > > > > sexual > > > > > > > > > > > > > > orientations don't have full rights in this > country, > > > they > > > > > > > won't > > > > > > > > > find > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that in me.” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, Romney told the CPAC audience that as > > > > > > > Massachusetts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > governor, “Our conservative values also came > under > > > > > attack. > > > > > > > Less > > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > year after I took office, the state’s supreme > court > > > > > > > inexplicably > > > > > > > > > > > found > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a right to same-sex marriage in the constitution > > > written > > > > > by > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adams. I presume he’d be surprised.” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “When I am president, I will defend the Defense > of > > > > > Marriage > > > > > > > Act,” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Romney continued. “And I will fight for an > amendment > > > to > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > > > > > constitution that defines marriage as a > relationship > > > > > between > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > man > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a woman.” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > His pronouncement against same-sex marriage came > > > during a > > > > > > > > > conference > > > > > > > > > > > > > > where antigay rhetoric has not so far been a > major > > > > > rhetorical > > > > > > > > > focus. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rick Santorum, who took the main stage a few > hours > > > before > > > > > > > > > Romney, did > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not directly mention marriage, though he said as > > > > > president > > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > > > > > > administration would “surround ourselves … with > > > people > > > > > who > > > > > > > share > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > > > > > values,” namely the belief that rights don’t > > > originate > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > government, but from “a higher authority.” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Romney’s remarks were met with moderate, if not > > > electric, > > > > > > > > > applause > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from the audience, which saved its heartiest > > > responses > > > > > for > > > > > > > his > > > > > > > > > pledge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to repeal the health care law, his no-apologies > quip > > > for > > > > > > > being a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > successful businessman, and his characterization > of > > > > > President > > > > > > > > > Obama > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “the poster child for the arrogance of > government.” > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GOProud executive director Jimmy LaSalvia, who > has > > > been a > > > > > > > > > personal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supporter of Romney, said Friday of the > candidate’s > > > > > > > statements, > > > > > > > > > “We > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are deeply disappointed with Governor Romney’s > > > speech at > > > > > CPAC > > > > > > > > > today. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of simply saying that he opposed gay > > > marriage, > > > > > Romney > > > > > > > > > instead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > chose to play to the ugliest and most divisive > > > impulses > > > > > in > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > country. If he thinks this is the way to > > > > ... > > > > read more » > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- *Mark M. Kahle H.* * * * * -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
