Thus a stereotype is reinforced...

[Wingates_Hellsing]

A few talking points:

A) There's plenty of deceiving to go around, and Republicans as much as anyone else have made deceiving the public part and parcel of dealing with their less scrupulous representatives, we just get a lot of examples of them being bad at it, doesn't change the probability that there's those that are succeeding and the fact that those failing were still trying. It's time to let go of black and white and accept the shades of gray, or if you've not been living under a rock for the last century or so, HD

B) The democrats may be 'in the lead' so to speak as the republicans were before, but that doesn't mean they can get away with anything they want. There's still plenty of conservatives, moderates of all stripes and democrat disagreement for the law-making process (which can really only be encouraged by the president, not as is insinuated, utterly controlled) to carry on in it's inertia as per usual.

C) But, seeing as so much of our legal system uses the term 'Marriage' or similar, the most efficient and effective manner in which we can provide for alternative couples is to include them in the legal definition of marriage. Everyone else can have whatever personal definition they want, but words don't belong to anyone without a copyright.

Also, it's because all systems of government are flawed as necessitated by the fact that nothing's perfect. However, this is no excuse to move forward with making said government as good as it can be, which is the job that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends. Some people - started doing it not knowing what it was, and now they're all stuck doing it forever just because, this is the job that never ends...

-Sir Integra Fairbrook Wingates Hellsing

[Imprl59]

A few talking points:

A) There's plenty of deceiving to go around, and Republicans as much as anyone else have made deceiving the public part and parcel of dealing with their less scrupulous representatives, we just get a lot of examples of them being bad at it, doesn't change the probability that there's those that are succeeding and the fact that those failing were still trying. It's time to let go of black and white and accept the shades of gray, or if you've not been living under a rock for the last century or so, HD

Oh there's plenty of deceit alright. If I had my way we would vote every last one of them out of office but on this issue I think the party lines have prettty well been drawn out on front street however in the backrooms of Congress I think neither side gives a damn about rigting this wrong.

B) The democrats may be 'in the lead' so to speak as the republicans were before, but that doesn't mean they can get away with anything they want. There's still plenty of conservatives, moderates of all stripes and democrat disagreement for the law-making process (which can really only be encouraged by the president, not as is insinuated, utterly controlled) to carry on in it's inertia as per usual.

I disagree with you on this one. In my lifetime there has never been an issue as hotly contested as this healtcare reform initiative was. Not one single Republican voted for healthcare reform in the house but it still passed. There may or may not be repercusions come election time but the point is they managed to do the impossible but haven't even tried to do anything about equaliizing marriage. Perhaps they will prove me wrong and go after that next. I'll be very surprised if they day though.

C) But, seeing as so much of our legal system uses the term 'Marriage' or similar, the most efficient and effective manner in which we can provide for alternative couples is to include them in the legal definition of marriage. Everyone else can have whatever personal definition they want, but words don't belong to anyone without a copyright.

I don't know that it is posible to separate the term marriage in to a different legal and spiritual meaning. Right or wrong many religious people feel homosexuality is a sin and the fear mongers will convince enough of them that the gays are trying to force the church to marry them.

The word marriage or some derivitive thereof appears in the Bible 61 times. I think it would be much easier for the government to adapt and move forward with a new term that applies to everyone equally than it would be to convince religious persons to go back and revise two thousand years worth of history.

Also, it's because all systems of government are flawed as necessitated by the fact that nothing's perfect. However, this is no excuse to move forward with making said government as good as it can be, which is the job that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends. Some people - started doing it not knowing what it was, and now they're all stuck doing it forever just because, this is the job that never ends...

-Sir Integra Fairbrook Wingates Hellsing

I hope that you let out the NOT in the second sentence as in -this is no excuse NOT to move forward....- Flaws and all America is a great country and I consider myself lucky to live here every day.

Steve B.

[bunnyboy]

Ugh, I'm actually slightly on Smiley's side here. Republicans started to turn down a very conservative path long ago (and hey Dems did the same going down a very Liberal not always good path about the same time) Unfortunately, nobody has the balls to actually call out the sanctity of marriage folks on the one problem, GLBTs aren't asking for special marriages they're asking for *gasp* what everyone else gets, not a fucking church wedding, no that little slip of paper that says you can do the following things Jointly file taxes, actually be by the person you love's side when they're dying, and all the stuff that married straight people can do. No I don't mean the religious marriage that's just pomp and circumstances for the real LEGAL marriage (fun fact: you can be married in God's eyes but in the eyes of the state you're still two single individuals).

As for sanctity of marriage, yeah I'll believe any politician Conservative, Centrist or Progressive/Liberal when they annul their current marriages and go back with their first wives.

[Fryk]

You know what I think the most heinous argument out there is? "Oh, but they DO get equal rights, they can marry anyone of the opposite sex, the same as everyone else!"

[HYHYBT]

You know what I think the most heinous argument out there is? "Oh, but they DO get equal rights, they can marry anyone of the opposite sex, the same as everyone else!"

I find it ironic and, it its own way even amusing, that that argument is usually paired with describing the ability to marry someone of the same sex as a "special right," as if, were it legal, straight people wouldn't be allowed to do it.

Bonus points if they pretend it would be necessary to prove your orientation, and ask how you would go about doing so.

[Fryk]

Just tell the fundies that you could indentify yourself with the "666" mark on your head that all homosexuals share. Then watch as they're dumb enough to believe you.

[smileyeagle1021]

I find it ironic and, it its own way even amusing, that that argument is usually paired with describing the ability to marry someone of the same sex as a "special right," as if, were it legal, straight people wouldn't be allowed to do it.

Oh but you see, a gay man marrying a woman is Biblically correct and moral (after all, just ask the Mormon church, that will "cure" the homosexual).
A straight man marrying another man just wouldn't be an option because it is against leviticus.
Sadly, their logic is starting to make sense to me...

[Fryk]

Their logic DOES make sense... if you buy into the original premise. That's what makes the whole problem, wel, a problem.