To: little jeremiah
Marriage is sacred.
2 posted on
02/23/2004 8:59:10 PM PST by
I_Love_My_Husband
(Borders, Language, Culture, Straights - now more than ever)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
It's simple. The law says no gay marriage. End of discussion, but we all now harmful the activist judges are. Eventually, it'll end up in the U.S. Supreme Court. The place it shouldn't be to begin with. It's frustrating.
3 posted on
02/23/2004 9:01:40 PM PST by
writer33
(The U.S. Constitution defines a Conservative)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
When the elected and appointed officials WILL NOT UPHOLD LAW AND ORDER, it is time that the people take over.
Now is not the time to get rid of guns, just look what is happening to us, "we the people".
4 posted on
02/23/2004 9:01:49 PM PST by
tessalu
To: I_Love_My_Husband
honestly, they have 3400 already...with the courts the way they are, this will only stop a) when all the gay couples in the state are already married, and b) when we have been overwhelmed with the 25 million guest workers in from Mexico....
To: I_Love_My_Husband
"Mayor Newsom is upholding the state Constitution, which explicitly outlaws discrimination of any kind"Do these people really believe this stuff? Where does the constitiution "explicitly" outlaw discrimination of any kind? Are CCW permits available to all, or just the elite?
10 posted on
02/23/2004 9:09:39 PM PST by
sangoo
To: I_Love_My_Husband
I wish more people would talk about the significance of marriage in creating not just a union of individuals, which will at best last a lifetime, but rather a family, which can last indefinitely--even after the progenitors are long dead.
While not all family ties are by blood, by far the strongest are those that are either biological or are regarded as being such. If a man and woman adopt a child, they can announce themselves as being the child's mother and father; biological or not, it makes no difference. But if two men adopt a child and try to introduce themselves as either each being a father, or as one being a mother and the other the father, it's won't take an Einstein to realize something doesn't compute.
11 posted on
02/23/2004 9:21:44 PM PST by
supercat
(Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
FOX news just reported a poll .
The number of people opposing homosexual marriage in Massachusetts has gone up from 45% who oppose to 53% who now oppose.
People are "tolerant" of homosexuals as long as they're not standing in their back yard. Once homosexuals get in THEIR face, things change.
15 posted on
02/23/2004 9:36:42 PM PST by
concerned about politics
( Liberals are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
16 posted on
02/23/2004 9:45:47 PM PST by
EdReform
(Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL LOCKYER:
"I'm confused. I'll have to ask the courts if it's against the law for two guys to get married to each other."
THE 9TH CIRCUS:
"We think their rights is being violated and stuff."
MAYOR NEWSCOM:
"I think it's discriminatory toward men who aren't women and women who aren't men to say that marriage can only be between one man and one women."
GOVERNOR SCHWARZENEGGER
"I have instructed Democrat nut Lockyer to tell Mayor Newscom that he needs to stop breaking dah law. I'm sure he vill get to it eventually."
TRIUMPH THE INSULT DOG:
"San Francisco is a great city. I love the city by the bay. In fact, I can't think of a better state than California... for me to POOP on."
STOP THE PUPPET SHOW!
To: I_Love_My_Husband
I smell a 'Rat behind this marriage debacle in CA.
What better way to remove fiscal concerns from the minds of the California people as to place them on the back burner of political agenda?
19 posted on
02/23/2004 10:38:12 PM PST by
EGPWS
To: I_Love_My_Husband
So lets say the CSSC rules the right way. And lets say that this leads to ending of these licences. What I want to know is what are they going to do with those officals who broke the law and those judges that refused to uphold it. This will never be over until they are all delt with and punished.
21 posted on
02/23/2004 10:57:58 PM PST by
Revel
To: I_Love_My_Husband
How come we have an AG who can't read?
I would think you at least need to be able to read to be AG.
Oh well, I would have thought you had to have some balls too.
22 posted on
02/23/2004 11:10:02 PM PST by
philetus
(Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
Let me know if you want on or off this (very busy) ping list.
31 posted on
02/24/2004 1:54:37 AM PST by
little jeremiah
(...men of intemperate minds can not be free. Their passions forge their fetters.)
To: I_Love_My_Husband
The highly paid AG can't read the law? He has to check it out first? How clear does it need to be? ONE man ONE woman. Sheesh, fire these people and NO benefits!
40 posted on
02/24/2004 8:43:13 PM PST by
Libertina
(Praavda not challenging enough? Enroll in Abcnbccbscnbccnn Comrade College)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson