Senate officially opens debate on Gay Marriage Amendment.

[Solly]

Originally posted by loinburger
From the results of a 2001 Gallup poll:



Even if we assume that all of the remaning 48% who disapprove of homosexuality would be willing to employ assault and battery to voice their disapproval, the "99%" estimate is still way off.

I'd probably call it an acceptable alternative lifestyle.

But with qualifications. Do those get listed the survey?

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
I'd probably call it an acceptable alternative lifestyle.

What definition of "acceptable" are you using? Generally, when something is "acceptable," people don't advocate the use of assault and battery to eradicate it. I'd hate to know how you'd treat homosexuals if you disapproved of their lifestyle.

[Last Conformist]

Nah. He's just anxious to appear PC in anonymous polls.

[Solly]

Well it's acceptable, in private.

I think you'd get rather different %ages if you asked if you wanted gays holding and kissing openly in public.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Park Avenue


I'd probably call it an acceptable alternative lifestyle.

But with qualifications. Do those get listed the survey?

How many times do we have to tell others that there is no single gay lifestyle?

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by MrFun



How many times do we have to tell others that there is no single gay lifestyle?

It doesn't really matter how many times you say it. Some people are uneducatable. Try a gas chamber instead.

[Solly]

Try a gas chamber instead.

[Provost Harrison]

As for gay lifestyle, well, think back to all the people you have seen and think how many camp and flamboyant people you bump into day to day. Now bear in mind that 1 in 10 people are gay. They really can't account for a very significant proportion of the gay section of society can they?

[Whaleboy]

So PA what are you actually trying to say here? Furthermore, how does public opinion (regardless of your skewed and wholly unrepresentative opinion of it) represent any basis upon which people should be told how to run their lives. What "alternative" will you suggest before you accept that some people know better about themselves than you do? But above all, I want to know what you're trying to say... post a basic argument in response to this post, not reactionary flames that are more attention-seeking than anything from where I'm sitting.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
So PA what are you actually trying to say here?

Like you'll ever get anything other than weaseling out of him.

Either he really believes in violence towards homosexuals, but he's too chick**** to come out and say it, or he doesn't and is instead pretending to be some sort of ubermacho twit who's all talk and no walk.

[Boris Godunov]

At any rate, the ammendment is doomed:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040713/ap_on_go_co/gay_marriage

Gay Marriage Ban Divides Senate GOP

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent

WASHINGTON - Short on votes and beset by internal divisions, Senate Republicans struggled Tuesday to salvage a respectable defeat for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, an issue that President Bush (news - web sites) pushed toward the top of the election-year agenda.

"This issue is not going away," Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee said in a virtual concession that the measure would fall short of the 60 votes needed to advance past a Wednesday test vote. "Will it be back? Absolutely, yes," he added.

Democrats, many of whom oppose the measure, took delight in the internal Republican woes, and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois read aloud from a recent statement on the issue by Lynne Cheney, wife of the vice president. "When it comes to conferring legal status on relationships, that is a matter that should be left to the states," he quoted her as saying.

The emotionally charged proposal, backed by the president and many conservatives, provides that marriage within the United States "shall consist only of a man and a woman."

A second sentence says that neither the federal nor any state constitution "shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman." Some critics argue that the effect of that provision would be to ban civil unions, and its inclusion in the amendment has complicated efforts by GOP leaders to gain support from wavering Republicans.

While there was no disagreement that the measure would fall short of the 60 votes needed to advance, Republicans held out hope they could gain a majority. Even that seemed in doubt, although their chances improved when an aide to Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) said he and vice presidential running mate John Edwards (news - web sites) did not intend to return to the Capitol for what amounted to a procedural vote. Both men oppose the amendment.

The Senate moved toward a showdown as House Republicans pursued a different plan — seeking to pass legislation rather than an amendment.

The House Judiciary Committee (news - web sites) scheduled a meeting for Wednesday on a measure to strip federal courts of jurisdiction over a 1996 federal law that defined marriage as the union between a man and a woman.

Bush urged the Republican-controlled Congress last February to approve a constitutional amendment, saying it was needed to stop judges from changing the definition of the "most enduring human institution."

The odds have never favored passage in the current Congress, in part because many conservatives are hesitant to overrule state prerogatives in the area of issues such as marriage.

But Republican strategists hope to force Democrats to choose between voting the wishes of their liberal constituents, some of whom favor gay marriage, or in favor of an amendment that polls show is favored by a heavy majority of the country.

"They want to put senators on the spot. Ads will be running. Trust me," said Durbin, who added that the Republicans were trying to "change the subject" of the election away from the war in Iraq (news - web sites) and the economy.

In a string of speeches during the day, Republicans said their motivation was the defense of marriage, the well-being of children and a desire to prevent unelected judges from amending the constitution from the bench.

"There is a master plan out there from those who want to destroy the institution of marriage to, first of all, begin to take this issue in a few select courts throughout this country at the state level," said Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo. Pointing to rulings in Vermont and Massachusetts, he said that "once they get their favorable rulings from activist judges ... they want to take it to the federal courts and they'll eventually move it to the Supreme Court."

In a strongly worded speech, Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said some criticism runs along these lines: "Marriage is hate. Marriage is a stain. Marriage is an evil thing. That's what we hear. People who stand for traditional marriage are haters, they're bashers, they're mean-spirited, they're intolerant. ... Well, we're not," he added.

Several Republican senators have argued in private meetings in recent days that their leaders are making a political mistake by trying to force the amendment to a vote. One lawmaker said there were fresh expressions of concern at a weekly closed-door meeting during the day.

At the same time, several aides said Santorum and Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon both urged fellow Republicans to support the measure on the test vote, depicting it as an issue of loyalty to the GOP leaders.

Smith has been among Republicans expressing concern about the amendment as drafted, saying he prefers a simpler one-sentence version. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, citing the confidentiality of the discussions.

Under the Constitution, it takes a two-thirds vote by both houses of Congress to submit an amendment to the states. Approval by three-fourths of the state legislatures is required to complete ratification.

I love Frist's shriek of defeat. "We'll be back!" Hmm, they can't get enough votes for even a majority during an election year when the GOP controls both houses and the presidency. Sorry, Billy boy, but this is the best shot your ilk will ever have at it.

[Sava]

god, republicans are a bunch of ****ing *******s... and morons too...

[Boris Godunov]

How unfortunate that this douchebag Gordon Smith will be my Senator in a little over a month.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
Insults Poor debating technique

Ladeez and genitals- the pot decries the negritude of the kettle!

I vary my technique for my intended target- it's not like satire, wit, subtlety and logic are going to have much effect on you.


It'd be like feeding foie gras and caviare to a chimpanzee.

[Whaleboy]

MB is my hero!