Then for the same reason we need drinker and smokers rights, we are born with it too” - dila
People aren't born smokers or drinkers. They're almost certainly born gay. So your analogy doesn't work (IMO).
Not only that, but you don't have to believe civil unions are required under the equal protection clause, to believe that they should be made available.
To straights who might want to pool their resources as well. They are a contract between two people, that simulate marriage, w/ the rights and burdens.
If gays want the spiritual part, and they can find some holy man willing to do it, well that's between them and him. But it has nothing to do w/ civil unions or the government.
“This is a mistake on his part. It should be left up to the states” - Winstons Julia
I believe in gay rights, but I don't see anything wrong w/ this pledge other than the “vigorous defense of DOMA”. I would have no problem signing the rest of it.
The President has nothing to do w/ constitutional amendments, so why not let the states debate it, whatever it is?
And I don't want nine unelected priest-kings on the bench deciding these things.
I also disagree that social conservatism has no place in this election. It's necessary to explain why Presidential appointments are important, and to get out the so-con voters.
Let Obama explain he wants to appoint Justices who want to treat KSM the same as a purse snatcher, and we'll see who wins the issue on Judges/Justices.
“One, support sending a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification.”
Where is your evidence that ‘perverts’ are born that way. Personally I am sick of being required to pervert the language to demonstrate I accept such nonsense. Do a history check and find the last ‘great’ nation who survived over blessing a perverted lifestyle.
“I believe in gay rights, but I don’t see anything wrong w/ this pledge other than the “vigorous defense of DOMA”.”
You may have stumbled into the wrong website to push your queer agenda.
“People aren’t born smokers or drinkers. They’re almost certainly born gay. So your analogy doesn’t work (IMO).”
You are totally wrong on this, you should research more.
The same type of changes in genes that predispose someone to being gay exist for drinking and smoking.
If you genetically test people for being gay, you find heterosexuals that have been normally married for 40 years.
This is a Fact.
Not on FR.
If you support the homosexual agenda you are anti-Constitution and you'll get the zot from FR!