http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040224_829.html

Is this really representative of our government's - and, I'm afraid to say, public's - intellectual stature?

A constitutional amendment to discriminate against at least 5% of our population?!

To be gay is NOT normal. it is against NATURE.
and most gay people behave like idiots.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kelly:
[QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Bulb Fiction:
[qb] To be gay is NOT normal. it is against NATURE.
and most gay people behave like idiots.

By that definition, your "President" is a queen.

Bulb Fiction:"most gay people behave like idiots."
Do you know "most gay people"? How can you say that? No matter your position on the issue, that is a strong assumption.....

So I guess that makes you gay- seeing how in almost everyone of your posts on this board you've acted like an idiot...its funny how the people that are the most vocal opponents of gays usually turn out to be the biggest closet peter puffers. Can you say J. Edgar Hoover?..... What gays want to do with their lives has no bearing over my life so why should I care if they want to get married? This is really just a sad attempt to divert attention away from the topics the Bush administration doesnt want to talk about.

Well, I believe black people are not normal, it's against nature not to be white, and most black people behave like idiots.

Therefore there should be a constitutional amendment against them getting married. After all, marriage is a sanctious institution that's reserved for white people and I don't want mine ruined.

Hey, how 'bout them Red Sox!??!

Let's have an amendment forbidding them from getting married too!

IMHO specification of Marriage between only 1 Man and 1 Woman should not have to be spelled out. Unfortunately, due to the unlawful actions in San Francisco, our Government's system of checks and balances are slipping into choas. Not surprisingly, Bush has no choice but to voice concern and direction regarding an issue resulting from people making a decision to oppose the populous. Why are they in defiance and feel it necessary to validate their unions? So that they don't have to feel bad, in a vainly futile attempt for the purpose of feeling good about themselves from their choice to relate sexually with those of same gender as themselves. And because, it is a ultimately a choice they have made to live a homosexual lifestyle, discrimination is not applicable!

It's like someone who chooses to shoot someone else and cries "Discimination!" because they feel their civil rights have been violated by removing their freedom of choice to shoot someone else when they are thrown in prison!

Obviously, the law is the law. When someone violates the law there must be consequences. It is up to our government to uphold the law, not change it to accommodate those who would create anarchy.

Well no wonder both sides of this arguement hate the other side. It seems impossible to have a reasonable discussion at all without name calling or any sense of logic. Personally I don't either sides wants any discussion at all. That would not make for any good politics and there is no one to villianize. In a society that has no right or wrong, it is impossible to answer this question or any other moral question that the Government tries to legislate.

Jeff