You must set the ad_network_ads.txt file to be writable (check file name as well).
Gay Marriage Rejected by NY State Senate [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

Log in

View Full Version : Gay Marriage Rejected by NY State Senate


yojimbo7248
12-03-2009, 03:38 AM
NYT is claiming this defeat signals political momentum, at least right now, has shifted against same-sex marriage.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/nyregion/03marriage.html?hpw

Anyone have anything interesting to say about the topic?

yojimbo7248
12-03-2009, 03:49 AM
I bet this will be brought up on the show today and I'm just hoping someone out there has a fresh perspective or something new to say.

WRESTLINGFAN
12-03-2009, 03:54 AM
I wonder if Phelps loves NY now

yojimbo7248
12-03-2009, 03:57 AM
I wonder if Phelps loves NY now

yeah, I'd love to see a supportive Phelps rally with signs saying "God hates Fags but loves the NY Senate"

mikeyboy
12-03-2009, 03:59 AM
yeah, I'd love to see a supportive Phelps rally with signs saying "God hates Fags but loves the NY Senate"

I'm sure they could find another reason to hate them.

yojimbo7248
12-03-2009, 04:04 AM
I'm sure they could find another reason to hate them.

yep, Phelps family are definitely the glass half empty types. just no pleasing them.

I would have loved to see Shirley in the studios a couple of weeks ago when she was in town.

Charlie_Don't_Surf
12-03-2009, 04:35 AM
Thank God.

http://blog.mattalgren.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/think-of-the-children.jpg

The NY Senate certainly does.

EliSnow
12-03-2009, 04:41 AM
I'm sure they could find another reason to hate them.

Does anyone really think they would praise Jew York?

EliSnow
12-03-2009, 04:42 AM
I bet this will be brought up on the show today and I'm just hoping someone out there has a fresh perspective or something new to say.

I can't wait to hear epo call in again today.

Misteriosa
12-03-2009, 10:13 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

she really nailed it. im so disappointed that this didnt pass :glurps:

nate1000
12-03-2009, 10:17 AM
I blame Adam Lambert's crotch.

Could someone get him back in the closet, please? He is not helping your cause.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 11:15 AM
I still don't think this is being pushed for equality.there are to many lawyers and they need work.imagine the untapped wealth they will have access to once they are able to persue same sex divorce.
Sure they talk awful purty, but this issue is more about money and political gain than it is equality.

Thanks for the vid misteri....I watched half.

spankyfrank
12-03-2009, 11:26 AM
There are two problems with the issue.

1) There isn't enough interest in the state to really motivate the bill to go through.

2) Despite NY being a blue state, the senate is mostly republican.

lleeder
12-03-2009, 11:56 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

she really nailed it. im so disappointed that this didnt pass :glurps:

She looks like a poor mans ricky lake.

brettmojo
12-03-2009, 12:02 PM
Good.

Now how about they start working on shit that really matters. Like the state budget maybe?

spankyfrank
12-03-2009, 12:03 PM
Good.

Now how about they start working on shit that really matters. Like the state budget maybe?

That's crazy talk...... :wacko:

Marc with a c
12-03-2009, 01:09 PM
I blame Adam Lambert's crotch.

Could someone get him back in the closet, please? He is not helping your cause.

you forgot to quote mikey.

zang!

yojimbo7248
12-03-2009, 01:11 PM
Senator Savino put it perfectly.

SouthSideJohnny
12-03-2009, 01:23 PM
She looks like a poor mans ricky lake.

ricky lake IS the poor mans ricky lake.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 02:38 PM
....such boone for lawyers. Don't make lite of the animosity the gay lobby maintains for religious establishment...the legislation would just be a foot in the door to keep the church in court for not allowing them use of facilities or actual ceremony preformance.

underdog
12-03-2009, 02:49 PM
the legislation would just be a foot in the door to keep the church in court for not allowing them use of facilities or actual ceremony preformance.

What?

tanless1
12-03-2009, 03:19 PM
Sue the priest for not preforming the ceremony. Sue the church(any church) for not renting to the couple the facility....rooms.
....is that what your asking ?

underdog
12-03-2009, 03:23 PM
Sue the priest for not preforming the ceremony. Sue the church(any church) for not renting to the couple the facility....rooms.
....is that what your asking ?

Yeah, that's what I was asking.

It's just a ridiculous statement.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 03:26 PM
...no, its not ridiculous....they will probably try to use a dirivative of the hate speech legislation.

underdog
12-03-2009, 03:28 PM
...no, its not ridiculous....they will probably try to use a dirivative of the hate speech legislation.

You religious people are hilarious. You're always the victim and thinking everyone is out to get you, even though you have all the power.

Can you even sue someone for them not letting you use their private property to get married on?

And why would a gay couple want to get married by a priest who doesn't believe in their right to marriage? That's just fucking crazy.

Ritalin
12-03-2009, 03:30 PM
...no, its not ridiculous....they will probably try to use a dirivative of the hate speech legislation.

"how could you be so obtuse?"

Misteriosa
12-03-2009, 03:31 PM
"how could you be so obtuse?"

"is it deliberate?"

tanless1
12-03-2009, 03:32 PM
I don't believe I've labled you, underdog. If you'd like more clarification on my religous views and how so many get it so wrong....I've posted plenty on the board that you can search.....

tanless1
12-03-2009, 03:33 PM
....I did refer to animosity toward the religious establishment , and the resentment that goes with it....

tanless1
12-03-2009, 03:36 PM
....heck, maybe I'm wrong.

Serpico1103
12-03-2009, 03:47 PM
....heck, maybe I'm wrong.

So, would you be fine with the government marrying gays, but not forcing churches to marry or respect marriages of gays?

boosterp
12-03-2009, 04:00 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

she really nailed it. im so disappointed that this didnt pass :glurps:

I agree with all she said, it is disappointing that it did not go through as I was just as disappointed when Texas voted it down.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 04:01 PM
Would that fall in the "out of my control" catagory ?
I feel it would be a poor social move for the goverment to endorse gay marriage...

brettmojo
12-03-2009, 04:02 PM
<object width="425" height="344">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dCFFxidhcy0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>


http://i25.tinypic.com/dcdn3s.jpg

Serpico1103
12-03-2009, 04:04 PM
Would that fall in the "out of my control" catagory ?
I feel it would be a poor social move for the goverment to endorse gay marriage...

Very few things are "in your control." I am asking your opinion.
Would you be ok with the government not marrying anyone; giving everyone a civil union and leaving marriage to the church.

sailor
12-03-2009, 04:05 PM
Can you even sue someone for them not letting you use their private property to get married on?

i bet you could if their only reason was because of your race or some other protected status.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 04:07 PM
I feel it would be a poor social move for the goverment to endorse gay marriage...

..I thought I had

Serpico1103
12-03-2009, 04:09 PM
..I thought I had

So, you are not against gay civil unions? And the government not marrying anyone?

keithy_19
12-03-2009, 04:10 PM
So, would you be fine with the government marrying gays, but not forcing churches to marry or respect marriages of gays?

This confuses me. Does the government force churches to marry or respect anything?

tanless1
12-03-2009, 04:14 PM
If you are looking for the hate and venom filled rehtoric, I'm not your guy.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 04:16 PM
This confuses me. Does the government force churches to marry or respect anything?

With hate speech legislation and disrimination laws is how they will approach it.
...I believe I recall this happening before...wish I could remeber where.

yojimbo7248
12-03-2009, 04:16 PM
it's perfectly fine if a church doesn't want to marry gay people. No one is saying they have to. It's also perfectly fine if religious people don't recognize gay marriage. My dad grew up in a conservative Catholic church that said that Protestant marriages are an abomination in the eyes of the Lord. You can believe whatever you want. Maybe many religious people think Hinduism is a load of crap and their wedding vows are crap. fine, but they can't keep the government from recognizing marriages that don't match their religious beliefs.

keithy_19
12-03-2009, 04:26 PM
I'm for gay marriage. I don't need all the heart felt speeches or anything. Just kind of makes sense to let two people who love each other be married. Doesn't change my life in the least, nor would it change anyone elses who is not gay.

Serpico1103
12-03-2009, 04:28 PM
This confuses me. Does the government force churches to marry or respect anything?

No, but I was wondering if that was his concern. His short answers are hard to work with.

If you are looking for the hate and venom filled rehtoric, I'm not your guy.

No. I am looking for the parameters of your position. What will you tolerate. I got one end, "no gay marriage." What is acceptable? Is divorce good for society? Should the government stop divorces? Ban remarriages?

I think the government should get out of the marriage game. If churches want to treat people different that is their right. I don't think the government should based on hetero v. homosexuality.

I like the right wing mouthpieces (Rush) who say gay marriage will hurt the "institution", but they have no problem with divorcing for convenience.

keithy_19
12-03-2009, 04:39 PM
No, but I was wondering if that was his concern. His short answers are hard to work with.

OK. I was confused. Makes sense now.

I like the right wing mouthpieces (Rush) who say gay marriage will hurt the "institution", but they have no problem with divorcing for convenience.

Shh. Divorce is fine as long as it ain't gay.

underdog
12-03-2009, 05:04 PM
I feel it would be a poor social move for the goverment to endorse gay marriage...

Why?

SatCam
12-03-2009, 05:19 PM
Gay Marriage Rejected by NY State Senate

pathetic

boosterp
12-03-2009, 05:28 PM
I'd also really like to mouth fuck Ms. Diane the Senator.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 05:33 PM
So, you are not against gay civil unions? And the government not marrying anyone?

When has it ever been illegal to draw up a contract. Non-issue

tanless1
12-03-2009, 05:39 PM
No, but I was wondering if that was his concern. His short answers are hard to work with.

...why would you seek to pigeon hole me, very dissapointing.

No. I am looking for the parameters of your position. What will you tolerate. I got one end, "no gay marriage." What is acceptable? Is divorce good for society? Should the government stop divorces? Ban remarriages?

I think the government should get out of the marriage game. If churches want to treat people different that is their right. I don't think the government should based on hetero v. homosexuality.

I like the right wing mouthpieces (Rush) who say gay marriage will hurt the "institution", but they have no problem with divorcing for convenience.

....I see where your coming from ( right wing mouthpieces) thought we were going to have a conversation.

..and the other issues bring up to gain parameters ? Getting ready to lob grenades ?

tanless1
12-03-2009, 05:41 PM
I believe divorce was addresses in my earlier statements....this being a new cash source for lawyers, and less about equality.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 05:47 PM
Why?

By the goverment endorsing gay marriage, can be distracting to our youth. I don't think it is the lifestyle any parent would seek for their child....everybody has a cross to bare in this life, for some, it is homosexuality.....its an all consuming distraction.

underdog
12-03-2009, 05:58 PM
By the goverment endorsing gay marriage, can be distracting to our youth. I don't think it is the lifestyle any parent would seek for their child....everybody has a cross to bare in this life, for some, it is homosexuality.....its an all consuming distraction.

So because some parents feel its wrong, the government should continue to discriminate?

According to your logic, the government never should have allowed mixed race marriages.

underdog
12-03-2009, 05:59 PM
Also, what, exactly, is distracting to the youth?

If you had learned about gay marriage as a child, would you have suddenly started sucking dick and married some dude?

high fly
12-03-2009, 06:27 PM
By the goverment endorsing gay marriage, can be distracting to our youth. I don't think it is the lifestyle any parent would seek for their child....everybody has a cross to bare in this life, for some, it is homosexuality.....its an all consuming distraction.


Was being "distracted" into being hetero all you needed to be straight?

If you had an equally powerful "distraction," would you have turned into a gay?



The whole idea is preposterous, either way. People are what they are and even if humans can be "distracted" so easily, i is no excuse to deny them fundamental rights that other adults have.
Don't bellieve the bullshit put out by the righties that there are equal rights now, there are not.

I know a lesbian couple that has a kid they adopted and 2 others born of artificial insemination. They are great kids and things went well for years, then got bad.
They split up and there just isn't any law in Virginia that adequately covers issues like custody and visitation rights in this situation, or division or jointly-held property. They were looking at well over $20,000 in legal bills each.
So then they got back together a couple years ago and things were fine until earlier this year when one came down with a virulent form of cancer.
She will die from it, probably in the next year.
Her mate does not have spousal rights in terms of inheritance or in end-of-life decisions, all kinds of things. I haven't talked to them in a while but it looks like the kids will have to be taken from their home when one of their parents dies, go into foster care, and the other parent get in line to try to adopt them.
It's all fucked up.

Because we have narrow-minded shallow-thinking dumbasses who don't think of how this shit actually plays out in real life of real people, Americans - our fellow citizens in the alleged land of the free - suffer needlessly NEEDLESSLY!



"distraction" my ass.........................................

tanless1
12-03-2009, 06:36 PM
....yes, I have skads of gay friends too Homosexuality is a choice...many are lured in by a seemingly compassionate ear, and an orgasm too. What better distraction from a problem than an orgasm.....I'm just talking from the years of social interactions with a high percentage of the gay.
......we can talk here, no need to rant.I don't expect to agree, and that's ok

tanless1
12-03-2009, 06:40 PM
....ever been to thr "I hate men" parties ?.....those are a hoot. Tiresome, but a hoot.

Penelope
12-03-2009, 06:47 PM
....yes, I have skads of gay friends too

I think you know some gay people. I do not believe they are your "friends".

underdog
12-03-2009, 07:39 PM
....yes, I have skads of gay friends too Homosexuality is a choice...many are lured in by a seemingly compassionate ear, and an orgasm too. What better distraction from a problem than an orgasm.....I'm just talking from the years of social interactions with a high percentage of the gay.
......we can talk here, no need to rant.I don't expect to agree, and that's ok

Any man who believes homosexuality is a choice is gay.

keithy_19
12-03-2009, 07:52 PM
I'd also really like to mouth fuck Ms. Diane the Senator.

In the spirit of the thread shouldn't you just be her best friend?

Dude!
12-03-2009, 08:23 PM
I know a lesbian couple that has a kid they adopted and 2 others born of artificial insemination. They are great kids and things went well for years, then got bad.
They split up and there just isn't any law in Virginia that adequately covers issues like custody and visitation rights in this situation, or division or jointly-held property. They were looking at well over $20,000 in legal bills each.
So then they got back together a couple years ago and things were fine until earlier this year when one came down with a virulent form of cancer.
She will die from it, probably in the next year.
Her mate does not have spousal rights in terms of inheritance or in end-of-life decisions, all kinds of things. I haven't talked to them in a while but it looks like the kids will have to be taken from their home when one of their parents dies, go into foster care, and the other parent get in line to try to adopt them.
It's all fucked up.

Because we have narrow-minded shallow-thinking dumbasses who don't think of how this shit actually plays out in real life of real people, Americans - our fellow citizens in the alleged land of the free - suffer needlessly NEEDLESSLY!



"distraction" my ass.........................................


please...the two lesbos
knew full well what the situation was
when they chose to bring those
2 kids into the world

why didn't they
as potential parents
think what could happen to those kids
if things went south?

because they were selfish and self-indulgent
and thought about themselves
and not the kids

i feel sorry for the kids
but not for the two
that set up this disaster

TheMojoPin
12-03-2009, 08:29 PM
please...the two lesbos
knew full well what the situation was
when they chose to bring those
2 kids into the world

why didn't they
as potential parents
think what could happen to those kids
if things went south?

because they were selfish and self-indulgent
and thought about themselves
and not the kids

i feel sorry for the kids
but not for the two
that set up this disaster

Sometimes your schtick is nothing short of appalling.

Dude!
12-03-2009, 09:29 PM
Sometimes your schtick is nothing short of appalling.

your very existence is appalling

PapaBear
12-03-2009, 09:56 PM
They split up and there just isn't any law in Virginia that adequately covers issues like custody and visitation rights in this situation, or division or jointly-held property.
This reminds me of THIS STORY (http://ronfez.net/forums/showthread.php?t=51634) that I posted several years ago. Things have gotten worse, since I first posted it. Vermont ruled that the "still" lesbian has shared parental rights. Virginia gave sole custody to the "lesbian turned Christian". It got as far as the US Supreme Court, but they refused to hear the case last year.

Now, since the birth mother still refuses to let the other woman have visitation, The Vermont court has granted sole custody to her. (http://www.examiner.com/x-11467-Boston-Lesbian-Relationship-Examiner%7Ey2009m11d25-custody)

EDIT: As I'm typing this, I found a newer update. The Vermont judge has tossed the case back to Virginia. (http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=791560)

This whole case is a cluster fuck. And both sides are very well funded. The Vermont woman is funded by gay rights organizations, and the Virginia woman is funded by Christian organizations.

In the end, I think the only difference between this case, and a case of divorce between a birth parent, and an adoptive parent (who are hetero), is the involvement on both sides by special interest groups trying to prove a point. This simply can't end well.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 11:18 PM
So then they got back together a couple years ago and things were fine until earlier this year when one came down with a virulent form of cancer.
She will die from it, probably in the next year.
Her mate does not have spousal rights in terms of inheritance or in end-of-life decisions, all kinds of things. I haven't talked to them in a while but it looks like the kids will have to be taken from their home when one of their parents dies, go into foster care, and the other parent get in line to try to adopt them.
It's all fucked up.
...

I'm teribly sorry for your friend, that is awful.
As for the issues you addressed inhereitance and child custody...that can be taken care of through a lawyer prior to her passing.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 11:21 PM
I remember that one bear.... I think the birth mother has the claim........and I lost the rest of my thought.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 11:37 PM
please...the two lesbos knew full well what

...may be a little harsh for this delicate conversation, attempting to maintain a certain level of respect.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 11:41 PM
Would you be ok with the government not marrying anyone; giving everyone a civil union and leaving marriage to the church.
...I don't know why govt is in the marriage buisness, other than recording/census data. I would also like to state my support for a Flat Tax.

tanless1
12-03-2009, 11:42 PM
...allright guys, I think I addressed most of your questions.....ill come back after you wake up.

Serpico1103
12-04-2009, 02:35 AM
...I don't know why govt is in the marriage buisness, other than recording/census data. I would also like to state my support for a Flat Tax.

Are you for the type of marriage that Christianity actually promotes? The woman loses all rights and identity to the husband? Or have you given into social pressure like the church and changed the Bible to suit your needs?

TjM
12-04-2009, 02:42 AM
She looks like a poor mans ricky lake.

Would you hit it?

tanless1
12-04-2009, 03:00 AM
Are you for the type of marriage that Christianity actually promotes? The woman loses all rights and identity to the husband? Or have you given into social pressure like the church and changed the Bible to suit your needs?
There is an old testament and the reformation that is the new testemant.
Please be more specific with your loaded questions. I do enjoy your barbs you pose as questions, but how about you stop trying to plot a gammit, and actualy have a conversation.

yojimbo7248
12-04-2009, 03:06 AM
the "gay marriage is a distraction" argument doesn't hold water. Yes, the people involved in working on the issue spend massive amounts of time developing the bill but for the vast majority of the NY Senate, it takes the time to say 'yay' or 'nay'. The senators will vote a many bills, some trivial, some more important. You should look at a list of bills voted on in Albany before anyone labels this a "distraction"

yojimbo7248
12-04-2009, 03:22 AM
I haven't heard it hear so I am not responding to anyone in particular but the idea that gay marriage ruins a "sacred union" is also bullshit. It's up to a couple's personal beliefs to make it sacred or not. A legal marriage is a civil contract recognized by the state and the only requirement is the two people are 1) over 18; 2) not married to anyone else. well, 3) obviously is they are of a different gender. Sacred has nothing to do with it. Marriage is two things - a state sanctioned legal contract that practically any two consenting adults can get and a personal vow of commitment that is completely up to the two individuals. I don't understand Christians who have no problem with the state sanctioning a wedding between two Satanists but get their panties in a twist over gay marriage. You have no right to allow or deny a fellow American's right to get married based on your concept of 'sacred union'

EliSnow
12-04-2009, 05:01 AM
...I don't know why govt is in the marriage buisness, other than recording/census data. I would also like to state my support for a Flat Tax.

First, goverments have been in the "marriage business" for a long, long time. There have been marriage laws going back to ancient Babylon. Shit, people have been married by captains on ships for a long time.

Marriage is as much of a governmental instutition as it is a religious one. Anyone stating otherwise is either ignorant of the history or are attempting to rewrite history. Indeed, no one had a problem with the fact that government can marry people until the whole same sex marriage issue arose. The reason is because religions are not forced to recognize any marriages (or divorces) that they themselves do not perform.

Second, there are a number of reasons beyond tax reasons why marriage has been a legal institution regulated by the government, including property rights, estate rights and issues, and financial rights.

EliSnow
12-04-2009, 05:06 AM
....yes, I have skads of gay friends too Homosexuality is a choice...many are lured in by a seemingly compassionate ear, and an orgasm too. What better distraction from a problem than an orgasm.....I'm just talking from the years of social interactions with a high percentage of the gay.
......we can talk here, no need to rant.I don't expect to agree, and that's ok

This is ridiculous. I've wanted orgasms and I've never felt the need to gave a homosexual relationship to get one.

And if homosexuality was only about sex and orgasms, they wouldn't want to get married. They would just want to keep rest stops open.

I'm known homosexuals as well, and for people who are only attracted to their own sex, it's not a choice.

EliSnow
12-04-2009, 05:09 AM
I believe divorce was addresses in my earlier statements....this being a new cash source for lawyers, and less about equality.

Please. If the attorney's groups wanted this passed, it would be passed.

This is not a huge issue that lawyers are trying to push through for cash reasons.

Serpico1103
12-04-2009, 12:45 PM
There is an old testament and the reformation that is the new testemant.
Please be more specific with your loaded questions. I do enjoy your barbs you pose as questions, but how about you stop trying to plot a gammit, and actualy have a conversation.

Jesus offers one and only one reason for divorce: “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery” (vs. 9).

Do you really think that marriage laws at the time of Jesus were equitable?
If you believe in the Bible, believe in it. Don't morph it into something that is congruent to today's norms. Stand behind the ancient text.