By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Huckabee the Theocrat

Final-Fan on 17 January 2008
elprincipe said:
ssj12 said:
outlawauron said:
I think this has been spinned pretty badly.

I agree with the bill of defineing marriage as it literally means bond (can't think of better word at the moment) between man and a woman.

I disagree with it. I have plenty of lesbian friends that love eachother. Saying they cant have a bond between eachother is wrong. Hopefully it DOESNT pass as it goes against the morals this country was founded on mainly FREEDOM.

You have a common misunderstanding of this issue. Anyone can marry anyone else or multiple someone elses or have any other arrangement they want. There is no law that says or ever will say someone can't have whatever arrangement they want in a relationship, so long as it is between consenting adults.

The real issue is whether the government recognizes this arrangement as a legal status, thus giving certain legal rights. The argument is over whether the government should extend these legal rights to same-sex marriage, not whether to outlaw someone going to a new age church and having a same-sex marriage performed.

So what non-religion-based reason would the state have to disallow same-sex partners from entering in a partnership contract with exactly the same rights, responsibilities, and privileges as the one available to different-sex partners?

Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Around the Network
damkira on 18 January 2008

@thetonestarr

Great job. Hurling petty, childish insults at people who you disagree with is much easier than making a coherent argument.

 



phil on 18 January 2008
mrstickball said:
Funny you guys mention the separation of church and state, when it's never implied in the constitution or any federal document in the 1700's.

Except for that pesky little first amendment thing.  The constitution may not ever explicitly use the phrase "separation of church and state," but it is very much implied:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

In addition to this, there is every reason to believe that the founding fathers supported the separation.  They were all heavily influenced by John Locke, who was a firm believer in the idea as well.  In addition, men such as Madison, the principal architect of the Constitution, explicitly stated himself that the separation of church and state is "guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States."

There is absolutely no question that the framers of the Constitution and the men behind the American revolution favored a secular state with a firm separation between said state and religion.



phil on 18 January 2008
PDF said:
ManusJustusNardus said:

I'm pulling for Huckabee or Romney because Democrats will have a hard time with McCain or Guillani. Well, McCain anyway because Rudy is out of it.


You wait untill Super Duper Tuesday. That is his gameplan, not saying it gonna work but thats why he ahsnt been in it.


A month ago, I would have said that his strategy was working.  Now, it's too close to say.  He's actually polling behind McCain in FLA and CA right now.  If he loses FLA, I think it's over for it.  This is, in my opinion, a damned shame.  He's the only Republican with social policies that aren't dictated by ideology.