Huckabee? IN the lead? Really?

Rana said:
They aren't denied civil unions/marriage based on their gayness, ahahahahahahahaha, this is the best post yet! Dixie! I love the circular reasoning! I do, I really do! It is splitting hairs is what it is Dixie! Good spin Dixie, but you would so lose in a court of law with this argument!
Click to expand...

Not splitting any hairs. Does "abortion" mean "murder?" Are the two words interchangeable? Certainly, some people would argue they are. Does that mean I should have the "right" to "abort" you for getting or giving abortions? Or maybe I should have the "right" to "abort" my neighbor for playing his stereo too loud... hey, it's an inconvenience for me... just like an unborn fetus is for you! Why isn't that the same thing? It's really quite simple, isn't it? Because "murder" and "abortion" are two different things, and society has not defined them to mean the same thing. The same is true with "marriage" and "same sex union" ...two different things, society hasn't defined them to be the same. You want to argue that "same sex union" means the same thing as "marriage" and it doesn't. But by insisting this definition has been established already, you can go on to make a case for some 'discriminatory' practice, which isn't happening. People are not granted marriage licenses on the basis of their sexuality. If that were the case, you'd have some kind of argument here, but that's not the case and you don't.

It's interesting you mentioned CU's... I favor CU's and think that is a way to facilitate the needs and allow the benefits for gay couples in America. Take government out of the "marriage" business completely, and instead, allow them to institute CU contracts. Yeah, I know, it's not the typical "social conservative" position on the issue, but it's my position, and I believe it could work. IF enough people were genuinely interested in fixing the problem for gay couples.... trouble is, activists such as yourself, would rather have the "issue" rather than solve it, because it gives you a hammer to bash the right with, and if it were solved... one less hammer in your toolbox. You care more about your political party and liberalism, than you do about gay couples and their rights.
 
Dixie said:
2004:
Arkansas Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 746,382 75.0%
No 248,827 25.0%

Georgia Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 2,317,981 76.1%
No 729,705 23.9%

Kentucky Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 1,217,857 74.6%
No 415,233 25.4%

Michigan Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 2,690,819 58.6%
No 1,900,578 41.4%

Mississippi Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 924,653 86.1%
No 149,854 13.9%

Montana Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 294,056 66.5%
No 147,927 33.5%

North Dakota Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 222,899 73.3%
No 81,396 26.7%

Ohio Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 3,249,157 61.8%
No 2,011,168 38.2%

Oklahoma Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 1,075,079 75.6%
No 347,246 24.4%

Oregon - Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 979,049 56.9%
No 742,442 43.1%

Utah - Defense of Traditional Marriage
Yes 562,619 66.2%
No 286,697 33.8%


2006:

South Carolina Amendment 1:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 818,894 78%
No 230,674 22%

South Dakota Amendment C:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 172,237 52%
No 160,756 48%

Tennessee Amendment 1:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 1,418,905 81%
No 327,162 19%

Virginia Ballot Question 1:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 1,325,668 57%
No 1,003,967 43%

Wisconsin Referendum 1:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 1,260,554 59%
No 861,554 41%

Colorado Amendment 43:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 768,700 56%
No 612,155 44%

Idaho Amendment 2:
Ban Same-Sex Marriage
Yes 281,823 63%
No 163,191 37%

2008:
California Prop 8:
Recognizing Marriage is between a man and woman
Yes 7,001,084 52.24%
No 6,401,482 47.76%

Florida Amendment 2:
Protection of Traditional Marriage
Yes 4,645,602 62.1%
No 2,833,052 37.9%

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Now there is more if you need to review it, but I think it is more than abundantly clear, in every ballot initiative, in every possible way to word it, in even the most liberal states in the union, The People have rejected Gay Marriage by HUGE numbers. Keep in mind, these results are in states where the interest was great enough to get an initiative on the ballot, and the gay activist lobby spent millions of dollars promoting it and getting out the vote to pass Gay Marriage. The "average" is around 70% opposed. In some areas, such as Tennessee and Mississippi, it is in the high 80s, near 90%! So can we now put this to rest once and for all, and stop blathering about some silly activist "poll" that is misleading on how people feel about this issue?
Click to expand...


-_-

You are comparing it on a state by state basis, not the US as a whole. You can't take elections that occurred at different dates from several different states with wildly different populations, "average" them together in your pinhead, and declare that the average for the US as a whole. A grade schooler could tell you this. Also, most of the referendums were held in conservative states.

The polling for gay marriage has improved on a consistent year by year basis. It was around 60-40 in 2004, 55-45 in 2007, and now it's come to the point where the majority is about to flip.


You are a child, Dixie.
 
Dixie said:
What physical harm does seeing someone masturbate cause? Who gives you the authority to determine what God "believes?" Morality in general, is based on some level of spiritual belief, to some degree. At some point, every moral value that humans have, can be traced to some spiritual belief found in mankind. You don't have to believe that, I can't make you accept it, but that is just a fact of life. We wear clothes and behave decently in public because of someone's moral values, rooted in their religious faith. We don't allow masturbation in public because it is perverted and disgusting and we are a civilized society, not a bunch of wild monkeys!
Click to expand...

Morality comes from algorithms programmed into us by evolution.
 
Old Today, 06:15 PM
Remove user from ignore list
Watermarx
This message is hidden because Watermarx is on your ignore list.
Click to expand...

Awww... Well, having absolutely no idea what you're posting, I would have to say, I think you are totally WRONG! Not positive, but pretty dang sure about that! Glad you could contribute! Have a blessed day!
 
Dixie said:
Oh, but it IS up to the people, and it's NOT like gay discrimination because no one is being discriminated against. Blacks have the exact same rights as anyone else, to marry a person of the same race, and they often do. No state is issuing marriage licenses on the basis of racial preference. There is no inequality of rights, and we simply never have had the unfettered right to pursue whatever "happiness" we desire, there are a multitude of laws on the books which prohibit all sorts of behaviors that would make people happy, but they are not allowed to do. Society does indeed have the right to establish standards, and always have.
Click to expand...

Fixed it.
 
You should think to yourself a bit when all that has to be done is to switch "gay" to "black" in your argument and it still says pretty much the same thing.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
The prospect of Mike Hucabee becoming POTUS is not something I could be excited about. He has all the earmarks of being far worse then W was.
Click to expand...

He seems very malleable. The FED will walk all over him like they're doing to Obama and the democrats will guilt him into anything they want by calling him a big old meanie!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top