Skip to comments.
Poll(CBS): Most Oppose Gay Weddings -
59% favor an amendment to the Constitution.
cbsnews.com ^
| 02/28/04
| cbs
Posted on 02/28/2004 7:23:43 PM PST by KQQL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Anywhere from 75-90% of people polled want the borders closed, illegal aliens deported, and our immigration laws enforced, and no one in DC gives a d**n . They got away with ignoring the citizen's feelings on NAFTA, they ARE getting away with ignoring us on open borders-why should they care how people feel about same-sex marriage? The Powers That Be can hardly wait for the day when there are no nations, only trading blocs under the UN and the WTO, where important people like them-lawyers, CEOs, and NGO members-can rule without any constraints like constitutional law. The forcing of same-sex marriage on an unwilling populace is just a small step towards that goal-one world, one government, one currency, no national laws...
21
posted on
02/28/2004 7:57:43 PM PST
by
kaylar
To: KQQL
When anarchy is alive, well and spreading across the land, why does anyone believe the Anarchists will obey a Constitutional Amendment?
22
posted on
02/28/2004 8:04:27 PM PST
by
leprechaun9
(Beware of little expenses because a small leak will sink a great ship!)
To: kaylar
If the elitists can be scared on this issue, it means they know they tide can be turned.
I guarantee thiss: Put a kerry, edwards, dean, nader, or clinton in offices and there will be NOTHING to stop evil.
To: KQQL
I'm in favor of an amendment only if it DOES NOT RECOGNIZE SAME-SEX "CIVIL UNIONS"
24
posted on
02/28/2004 8:11:06 PM PST
by
VxH
(This species has amused itself to death.)
To: VxH
Did you not hear? The homosexuals object because making the amendment FORBIDS FEDERAL RECOGNITION OF CIVIL UNIONS.
IOW if a particula state has civil unions, the civil union stops at the border. Thus CF does not affect TX.
To: KQQL
I bet Rosie O'Donnell is very, very, very, very shocked to hear the bulk of this country disagrees with her and her wife.
To: oceanview
>>and the amendment is the only way to stop it.
But what I've heard, and maybe I hear wrong, is that the amendment would recognize same-sex Civil Unions.
My impression is that Homosexuals don't care about religious marriage - they want the BENEFITS of being married.
Civil Union would provide those benefits.
Do we want consitutionaly protected same-sex "Civil Unions"? NO!
27
posted on
02/28/2004 8:15:09 PM PST
by
VxH
(This species has amused itself to death.)
To: KQQL
Voters do not cite gay marriage as the main issue they want to hear about this year. Right now, I'd wager a super-majority would say the same thing about John F'ing Kerry's "service" in Viet Nam.
28
posted on
02/28/2004 8:18:01 PM PST
by
upchuck
(Ta-ray-za now gets to execute her "maiming of choice." I'm hoping for eye gouging, how 'bout you?)
To: longtermmemmory
Oh, I'll vote for GWB-again!-but I really don't see how the elitists are going to be afraid just because they see public opinion polls running high against them on this issue. The numbers are running even higher against the nonenforcement of our immigration laws-they don't care. Overwhelming majorities were against NAFTA-they passed it anyway. They don't respect our beliefs, our values, or the Constitution-much less written law in CA . The tide may turn in terms of people's opinionsand feelings on this and other issues-but I don't think it'll stop them from forcing their will through in defiance of those attitudes, vialawless mayors, activist judges, and spineless Republican congresscreatures that are already signalling nonsupport of the president on a DOMA amendment to the constitution.
29
posted on
02/28/2004 8:20:04 PM PST
by
kaylar
To: longtermmemmory
>>Did you not hear?
Hopefully I did not understand what I heard. I ~thought what I heard was that civil unions would be recognized - but that "Marriage" would only apply to Man/Woman.
Lawyers and their definitions.
Are there any writen versions of the potential ammendment?
30
posted on
02/28/2004 8:20:13 PM PST
by
VxH
(This species has amused itself to death.)
To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping - Tra La la, Hee hee hee. Nanny Nanny Boo Boo. Etc.
Or in other words that shouldn't be spelled out on FR, Eat S*** and Die! (Sorry, it slipped out, I'll be more civilized tomorrow.)
If anyone wants on or off this ping list pingify me!
(I will be better, I promise. Just having a weak moment.)
31
posted on
02/28/2004 8:23:37 PM PST
by
little jeremiah
(...men of intemperate minds can not be free. Their passions forge their fetters.)
To: VxH
Not the amendment would not recognize civil unions. On the federal level only marriage between a man and a woman would have the incidents of marraige. Civil unions would be kicked back to the states INDIVIDUALLY with no state obligated to give FFC or equal protection to any other states civil union interpritation.
To: dc-zoo
>>Interesting choice of words..(dike).
Hmmm, I wonder, how many Gerbils would fit in Hoover's Dam.
33
posted on
02/28/2004 8:27:14 PM PST
by
VxH
(This species has amused itself to death.)
To: longtermmemmory
>>with no state obligated to give FFC or
>>equal protection to any other states civil union interpritation.
Thanks for the clarification.
34
posted on
02/28/2004 8:28:45 PM PST
by
VxH
(This species has amused itself to death.)
To: KQQL
...black voters would overwhelmingly vote Democratic in November. Three-quarters disapprove of Mr. Bush's job performance as president, and 82% now say they would vote Democratic in the November presidential election Vote Democratic? Well they may not be able to cozy up with their cindidate very well if it's the Brahmin John Kerry. It's one thing to say they'll vote Democratic but quite another to say they'll be energized enough to support John Kerry.
We'll see.
To: KQQL
This might be a good place for some enlightenment on the methods that will be followed in order to amend the Constituion or to form a Constituional Convention.
I've read some about a convention, but haven't really dug into it. Anyone care to grace us with your knowledge?
36
posted on
02/28/2004 8:33:48 PM PST
by
Tactical
To: Tactical
3/4 vote of approval in house and senate. Then 3/4 of the legislatures approving it in their legislatures.
38 states.
38 states have DOMA's either by law or amendment.
Mississippi is en route to becoming 39.
States with laws are looking to consider passing amendments.
Anyone who says this is a states issue is just plain wrong.
Anyone who says the court process needs to sort itself out is a day late and a dollar short. The tiger is at the gates, the time for sacifices at the temple is over.
To: Maynerd
LOL. Great line. May I quote you?
Sure. It's not my line, but I'd love to get credit for it :)
38
posted on
02/28/2004 9:08:41 PM PST
by
ClintonBeGone
(John Kerry is the Democrat's Bob Dole)
To: kaylar
Elitist have always been able to work in the courts with almost total impunity. If people wake up and actually start to push back, it will affect the ability of the ivory tower to "push". The pure radicals like Martha Burke will not be able to filter their ideas out.
Consider every paper written about homosexual marriages inevitability will be discredited. If they can be shown wrong about that, what else.
BTW I would not write off the immigration issue. I read somehwere hear on FR that border patrol is supposed to get their own predators.
To: KQQL
Add at least 10 percent to that figure. It would appear that the time is right to slam the door on at least one perversion.
40
posted on
02/28/2004 9:35:50 PM PST
by
IronJack
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson