constitutional Amendment? Call your senators and congresspeople

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
Ryanacci says it so well!

Why stand in the way of someone elses happiness. Look at some of the lovely same sex couples we have on here. Look how happy they look in the pictures. Why support someone who would want to thwart their happiness or stigmatize them , even though it doesn't affect you?

Because it's not about just ONE issue. Just because I disagree with President Bush on one issue, doesn't mean he loses my support on every other issue.

BTW, you never answered AFR's questions: Are you saying that agree with Senator Kerry on every single issue? If not, using your logic, then how can you support him? Especially when he does not support gay marriage.

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Minnie, I understand what you are saying. I care about this issue, but it is not my #1 issue. To me, national security and protecting the unborn are #s 1 and 2. First we need to protect life, that is more important than making life enjoyable. Things like this are secondary in importance. If President Bush were proposing an amendment to ban heterosexual marriage I would still support him.

In 2000 I was not old enough to vote, had I been old enough I would have voted for Nader. I believe he was the only candidate who stood up for what he believed in, even though I thought he believed in the wrong things on most important issues. Over the past four years I have come to love GWB because he is a man of honor, courage, and is somewhat stubborn. It is his unwillingness to budge that makes me like him so much. He is not your typical politician, he does what he believes in. I admire this so much even if I disagree with him on many issues. But I happen to agree with him on many issues as well as admire his character, so there's no way I can vote for anyone else.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Originally posted by Eeyore1954
Because it's not about just ONE issue. Just because I disagree with President Bush on one issue, doesn't mean he loses my support on every other issue.

BTW, you never answered AFR's questions: Are you saying that agree with Senator Kerry on every single issue? If not, using your logic, then how can you support him? Especially when he does not support gay marriage.

Steve, I guess you have to decide how much you can overlook that one issue. Does it bother your conscience? Obviously not.

People are different. it doesn't matter whether or not I agree with everything Kerry says. If he has said or done anything that goes against my core value system, then it would bother me. Don't always play follow the leader on here. Especially if it's on a path going to nowhere.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Originally posted by JoeThaNo1Stunna
Minnie, I understand what you are saying. I care about this issue, but it is not my #1 issue. To me, national security and protecting the unborn are #s 1 and 2. First we need to protect life, that is more important than making life enjoyable. Things like this are second nature.

I guess it's hard for me to get riled up when I can't even imagine being with one person for the rest of my life. But before I worry about that, I worry about living!

Joe, do you believe in Capital punishment?

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Nope I am against the death penalty. But a lot more babies are killed by abortion than killers killed on death row. If we were killing millions of prisoners, I wouldn't be able to support Bush. But we are killing millions of babies and only a handful of prisoners, so to me abortion is more important right now.

 

[AirForceRocks]

it doesn't matter whether or not I agree with everything Kerry says.

Then why should it matter whether or not I agree with everything President Bush says? You asked how people that disagree with him on this issue can still vote for him, yet you say yourself that you don't have to agree with everything Senator Kerry says in order to support him.

Why the double standard?

And FTR, I only disagree with President Bush on this issue insofar as I don't think this particular amendment is the way to go, nor do I believe any amendment is necessary at this time. But I don't favor gay marriages - I personally prefer civil unions that offer the same rights within the states. But I also believe that each state should be able to decide for itself whether or not to legalize gay marriage.

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
Steve, I guess you have to decide how much you can overlook that one issue. Does it bother your conscience? Obviously not.

And why should it bother my conscience? This is not an issue of right vs. wrong or good vs. evil. It is a clash of cultures that happens as society evolves.

BTW, I am not overlooking anything. I am making an informed choice based on a wide variety of issues.

People are different. it doesn't matter whether or not I agree with everything Kerry says. If he has said or done anything that goes against my core value system, then it would bother me. Don't always play follow the leader on here. Especially if it's on a path going to nowhere.

But it does matter whether or not you agree with Sen. Kerry on every issue. Because you have said on several posts on this thread "Why support someone who would want to thwart their happiness or stigmatize them , even though it doesn't affect you?" Well, the same can be said of Sen. Kerry, who does not support gay marriage. Yet, you continue to support him. So, are YOU overlooking this one issue? Does it not bother YOUR conscience?

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Steve, did Kerry say that he wants to amend the constitution like Bush does?

 

[goudaman40]

Well, the same can be said of Sen. Kerry, who does not support gay marriage. Yet, you continue to support him. So, are YOU overlooking this one issue? Does it not bother YOUR conscience?

Well said Eeyore

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
Steve, did Kerry say that he wants to amend the constitution like Bush does?

Why does that matter? Are you trying to find some way to wriggle out of the tangled maze you created with your own logic? You pose a double standard on this thread and now are trapped by your own words. Funny how that happens sometimes.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Originally posted by Eeyore1954
Why does that matter? Are you trying to find some way to wriggle out of the tangled maze you created with your own logic? You pose a double standard on this thread and now are trapped by your own words. Funny how that happens sometimes.

If what I'm saying makes you think, than I guess thats a good thing. To me there is a difference between trying to alter the constitution to make a point, and not doing that. You also said that you do not agree with this.

You are stuck in your own tangled web, my friend. I impose no standard, only throw out ideas. No one has to do anything that I say lol! Obviously if you feel that it's worthy of discussion, it must have hit a nerve or something.

 

[wvrevy]

I don't believe women should get abortions...I think they should strongly consider adoption instead, regardless of the fact that it would be a much harder road...But yet, I DON'T support legislation banning the practice. Why ? Because I believe in CHOICE, as a principle.

The same could be said for Kerry's stand on gay marriage: AGAINST the practice, but also AGAINST an amendment banning it in the United States Constitution.

This really isn't that hard.

 

[minniepumpernickel]

Originally posted by goudaman40
Minnie,

I'm going to quote a movie for you since your brought in the "happiness in pictures"

(One Hour Photo) - "When you look at a picture all you see are the happy moments in life."


You can't look at a picture and say that everything is rosey! There are also the sad, angry, upset moments that we choose not to photograph and remember. We want to remember the happy moments.

As far as the gay marriages - I've been on the fence on this . . . I just feel that one should not expect special treatment for their sexual orientation.

Yes, of course all relationships have bad moments. Gay and straight alike.

It's not about "special treatment" but about "equal treatment".

 

[wdwdvcdad]

Originally posted by wvrevy
I believe in CHOICE, as a principle.

This really isn't that hard.

how are you with school choice?

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
If what I'm saying makes you think, than I guess thats a good thing. To me there is a difference between trying to alter the constitution to make a point, and not doing that. You also said that you do not agree with this.

That's quite true. But NEITHER candidate supports gay marriage. The best Sen. Kerry can claim is verbally supporting "civil unions", and I've seen him do absolutely nothing tangible to flesh out that support. So, whether or not Sen. Kerry supports a constitutional amendment is moot. He has stated on several occasions that he does not support gay marriage. In that sense, he and Pres. Bush hold identical views on this issue.

You are stuck in your own tangled web, my friend.

I impose no standard, only throw out ideas.

Sure. The whole point of "how can you support someone who does not support gay marriage" theme in your posts on this thread is no double standard. If you say so...

No one has to do anything that I say lol!

Thanks for the permission!

Obviously if you feel that it's worthy of discussion, it must have hit a nerve or something.

The only thing worthy of discussion is your inability to see the double standard you created.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by wvrevy
I don't believe women should get abortions...I think they should strongly consider adoption instead, regardless of the fact that it would be a much harder road...But yet, I DON'T support legislation banning the practice. Why ? Because I believe in CHOICE, as a principle.

The same could be said for Kerry's stand on gay marriage: AGAINST the practice, but also AGAINST an amendment banning it in the United States Constitution.

This really isn't that hard.

Now that's interesting. An ammendment that codified a right to abortion would have been a much better way to go on that issue rather than the endless judicial pilpul we've had to endure since 1973. Perhaps same-sex marriage is another area where the national debate that would be necessary to actually ammend the constitution one way or the other would be beneficial.

 

[goudaman40]

You say they should get equal treatment . . .

Then that means that gay couples should not have fertility practices paid for because they lack all of the parts necessary to have children;

but insurance companies will pay for same sex couples to have IVF treatment; this same insurance company will refuse payment for IVF or any other fertility treatment.

So, this is "special treatment" not "equal treatment!"

 

[AllyandJack]

Kerry may very well come out and support a Constitutional amendment on this issue since he said he would consider it in the MA constitution. So, you never know.

You take chances with every candidate and you'll never agree on every issue with the candidate you like more. My problem with Kerry is that he's elusive about his position on the issue and then when he states a position, it is always subject to change. I'm sure that can be said for lots of politicians.

Something about gay marriage in MA: I had no problem with it. My aunt was "married' to a woman for over 50 years and they were very happy together. They have both died and it is sad that they never got a chance to make it "legal." Despite that, they took all the legal precautions when it came to inheritance rights, etc. What I DID have a problem with was the town clerks and the city clerks opening up at midnight - on MY tax dollars. You know they were getting paid OT. They provided music and food and cake - on MY tax dollars. I understand that there was a lot to celebrate, but I had to pay for my own reception and so should everyone else. I had to see the clerk during normal business hours and so should everyone else. That's where I had the problem.

It has nothing to do with the Constitutional amendment, but I can see what a previous poster said about special treatment and I think a lot of people are put off by it and wonder what might be next in terms of special treatment.

 

[InDueTime]

Yep, I called them. Asked them to vote FOR the amendment. Thanks for the reminder though.

 

[peachgirl]

Then that means that gay couples should not have fertility practices paid for because they lack all of the parts necessary to have children;

Wow! I never knew that gay people are anatomically different from heterosexuals!