Keith Olbermann

[ChrisFL]

Because drunk drivers can hurt other people. Giving drunk drivers the right to drive can affect the rights of other people to drive without getting injured.

How does giving some people the right to marry the person of their choice, hurt someone else? Exactly how does alllowing two people of the same sex hurt your marriage if your marriage happens to be between two people of the opposite sex?

It's not worth a response, really, some people here are just so off course it isn't even funny...its actually childish.

 

[LuvDuke]

Yes, they have the right to their opinions. Do they need to turn their opinions into law and make them constititional amendments? I say Rove will pay for this one in some significant way. I sincerely hope it's public. To use such an item to possibly change other election issues is evil.

The religious right is about to pay for this one big time. The one thing Americans understand is fundamental fairness.

Plus, the next generation doesn't care about this crap. That'll be the true demise of the religious right. The next generation will confine them to the garbage dump.

 

[sarasotamom]

I have always thought that Christianity was supposed to guide YOU in YOUR life. Instead it has become more of how you JUDGE others in their lives.

 

[Nancyg56]

Sounds like drug users complaining their rights are being violated by the laws...

Don't like it??? Move to a country that has laws that fit your lifestyle..

That is always the response..."If you don't like it then leave!" What a sad way to live, directing people who want to have the same rights and opportunities as others to get out is they are no happy with discrimination.

As much as people want to talk about people's opinion and the majority rules, people (even if it is a "majority") should not have the right to make laws that apply to some people and not to other people.

Well said.

Perhaps we should also do away with DUI laws, shouldn't drunks be allowed to drive just like the rest of us?

Again, what does a law that applies to everyone have to do with enacting a law that only applies to people who are different" and is based on religious beliefs? I keep wondering what happened to the separation of Church and State?

Many fear that allowing gay marriage will lead a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah of sorts. Unnatural sexual acts were occurring there, and many believe that allowing gay marriage legitimizes it and shows God that we endorse it.

I think one only needs to count the number of marriages and affairs that some heterosexual couples have engaged in to discredit this little theory.

With the divorce rate hovering around 50% in the good ole USA I dont think you need to blame the gays for "throwing marriage to the wolves".

And yet there are some of those same folks who have been divorced multiple times yet who would try to disallow a commitment that a gay couple would like to make legal.

 

[LuvDuke]

As stated before, all laws start from opinion. I have a right to go 80 mph on the highway, the law says no. My rights are infringed too, but I have to live by the law.

No, you do not have a right go 80mph. You do not even have a right to have a car. There is no constitutional right to owning or operating a car. This is stepping into the Bizarro world.

This isn't just any law. THis is civil rights and that is protected by the "equal protection" under the law clause in the 14th Amendment.

Proposition 8 is no different than a state voting to bring back "Jim Crow" laws. You don't get to vote on who or who shouldn't be granted Constitutional rights.

Unfortunately, gays are the last group that you can discriminate against openly. But there will be a penalty to pay for the prop 8 stupidity and discrimination. The next generation will take care of it the way the 50's/60's generation took care of "Jim Crow".

 

[chrisw127]

I wouldn't call you ignorant, but if thats how you see yourself, thats too bad..

Perhaps we should also do away with DUI laws, shouldn't drunks be allowed to drive just like the rest of us?

See, this doesn't make any sense at all and you're making a very poor argument. Drunk driving has the potential to hurt other people. Tell me how two people of the same sex marrying hurts you? Are you that uncomfortable with the idea that you would deny someone else the same rights that you have?

 

[chrisw127]

No, you do not have a right go 80mph. You do not even have a right to have a car. There is no constitutional right to owning or operating a car. This is stepping into the Bizarro world.

This isn't just any law. THis is civil rights and that is protected by the "equal protection" under the law clause in the 14th Amendment.

Proposition 8 is no different than a state voting to bring back "Jim Crow" laws. You don't get to vote on who or who shouldn't be granted Constitutional rights.

Unfortunately, gays are the last group that you can discriminate against openly. But there will be a penalty to pay for the prop 8 stupidity and discrimination. The next generation will take care of it the way the 50's/60's generation took care of "Jim Crow".

It's absolutely true. These laws are discriminatory on their face. There's no argument against it. Going around the law and changing the state constitution is, right now, the only way they can get around it. But that will change too.

 

[Kathi OD]

Since we are wanting to throw marriage to the wolves, how about letting men have as many wives as they want????

Why does it always have to be about men? What about letting women have as many husbands as they want?

 

[chrisw127]

Why does it always have to be about men? What about letting women have as many husbands as they want?

Because women are smart enought to know that more men just means more work.

 

[swanmom]

Why does it always have to be about men? What about letting women have as many husbands as they want?

Because, for most women, one is MORE than enough! (Sorry, couldn't resist adding a little levity!)

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Unfortunately, gays are the last group that you can discriminate against openly. But there will be a penalty to pay for the prop 8 stupidity and discrimination. The next generation will take care of it the way the 50's/60's generation took care of "Jim Crow".

That is being melodramatic. No one is "going to pay".

Things will evolve as they evolve. It will change, when is the question.

Now we have the "end of the world date" of Dec 21, 2012, which will be an election year.

Can you say BANNER YEAR for the Christians to spout their Rapture prophecy?

BTW...here are the supplies YOU WILL NEED to survive.

Next election.... WE ARE ALL GOING TO CRAZY TOWN!!!!!!!!!

http://www.december212012.com/products/2012_Survival_Shop.htm

 

[I loveStitchnippyjon]

Just in general terms, Olberman is obnoxious. DH refuses to watch the "Sunday Night Football" pre-game because of him. Why must he always intereject his personal opinions about totally unrelated things, into FOOTBALL?

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

Ignorance rules the day.

Before any more of it is displayed here, try actually READING the constitution. If it uses words that are too big for you, or for which you don't know the meaning, use a dictionary.

Marriage is allowed between two people. If those two people happen to be of the same gender, it is not allowed. That segregates the same gendered couples into the "aren't equal" category. Got it? It's pretty simple to understand.

Obfuscation of the truth has always been a hallmark of christianity, and opposers of equality for all.

 

[LuvDuke]

That is being melodramatic. No one is "going to pay".

Things will evolve as they evolve. It will change, when is the question.

Now we have the "end of the world date" of Dec 21, 2012, which will be an election year.

Can you say BANNER YEAR for the Christians to spout their Rapture prophecy?

BTW...here are the supplies YOU WILL NEED to survive.

Next election.... WE ARE ALL GOING TO CRAZY TOWN!!!!!!!!!

http://www.december212012.com/products/2012_Survival_Shop.htm

The paying will be in the form of becoming a marginalized fringe group with the new generation. They don't understand all this anti-gay BS.

The religious right are well on their way to becoming as marginalized as the old segregationists. They are too far out of where the mainstream is headed.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

The paying will be in the form of becoming a marginalized fringe group with the new generation. They don't understand all this anti-gay BS.

The religious right are well on their way to becoming as marginalized as the old segregationists. They are too far out of where the mainstream is headed.

Not in 2012. That is going to be their Christmas.

 

[Kathi OD]

Because women are smart enought to know that more men just means more work.

Because, for most women, one is MORE than enough! (Sorry, couldn't resist adding a little levity!)

I just didn't want to get into the whole man-bashing thingy....

 

[Charade]

Ignorance rules the day.

Before any more of it is displayed here, try actually READING the constitution. If it uses words that are too big for you, or for which you don't know the meaning, use a dictionary.

Marriage is allowed between two people. If those two people happen to be of the same gender, it is not allowed. That segregates the same gendered couples into the "aren't equal" category. Got it? It's pretty simple to understand.

Obfuscation of the truth has always been a hallmark of christianity, and opposers of equality for all.

Please, and excuse my ignorance (even though I'm not religous), point to the passage in the constitution that defines marriage between two people. I thought marriage has always been defined at the state level.

 

[Uncle Remus]

Please, and excuse my ignorance (even though I'm not religous), point to the passage in the constitution that defines marriage between two people. I thought marriage has always been defined at the state level.

Here's a part of the US Constitution that addresess states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That's what America should be.

 

[LuvDuke]

Here's a part of the US Constitution that addresess states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That's what America should be.

That is what America is. The religious right is the last gasp of the old segregationists.

 

[LuvDuke]

Please, and excuse my ignorance (even though I'm not religous), point to the passage in the constitution that defines marriage between two people. I thought marriage has always been defined at the state level.

Marriage is defined at the state level to a point where it does not violate the Constitution.

This prop-8 is no different than the old "miscegenation" laws the south had set up. They are unconstitutional. The states do not have any right to set up violations to the "equal protection clause" in the 14th amendment.