Voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin ban same-sex marriage

[Cristy 4]

Civil rights? how far they go? ponder this!

ACLU defends child-molester group

Asks judge to throw out lawsuit against NAMBLA for 10-year-old's murder

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: December 13, 2000

1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Julie Foster

© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

The American Civil Liberties Union has asked a judge to dismiss what it calls an "unconstitutional" lawsuit against a national pedophile organization being sued in a wrongful death case after two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10-year-old boy.

The $200 million civil lawsuit, which charges the North American Man-Boy Love Association with wrongful death, was originally filed in Massachusetts Federal District Court on May 16.

As reported in WorldNetDaily, Salvatore Sicari and Charles Jaynes picked up fifth-grader Jeffrey Curley and took the boy to the Boston Public Library where Jaynes accessed NAMBLA's website. Later, the men attempted to sexually assault Curley, but the boy fought back. Attempting to restrain him, Jaynes gagged the 10-year-old with a gasoline-soaked rag, eventually killing him. The men put Jeffrey's body in a tub with concrete and threw it in a river.

Thanks A.C.L.U. Fine job?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=18029

You are arguing apples and oranges. That is like lumping heterosexuals and serial killers. One is legal with 2 consenting adults, one is torture and abuse of a helpless child. Find a better argument and then come back and try again.

[meauxna 15]

See, you can get married and are considered married in the US even if no US authority ever issued a license or recorded the marriage.

Clearly for those of us who married overseas, our marriages had to be legal in their own jurisdictions in order to be 'recognized' by all of the US gov't.

We're talking ceremonies here in the US. If there is a way to legally married in the US without a license/recording, color me educated because I'm not aware that that is possible.

Back to the overseas legal marriage---same sex marriages are the only ones I'm aware of that are disregarded and can not be legal in the US, even when they are legal in the jurisdiction where the marriage occured (see Defense of Marriage Act/DOMA).

[Alex+R 0]

Marc, I hate everything you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Nobody likes NAMBLA except child molestors. That doesn't make them responsible for a murder.

The ACLU exists to protect civil liberties for everyone. Because all Americans are entitled to them, even the sick ones. But I'm really glad there are keen-eyed watchdogs like you out there trying to protect us from freedom. Phew.

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

marc, what does that have to do with this thread. you really need to connect the dots wee bit more. not all of us can follow your amzing ability to from a to z in one fell swoop.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Alex+R 0]

marc, what does that have to do with this thread. you really need to connect the dots wee bit more. not all of us can follow your amzing ability to from a to z in one fell swoop.

Daniel

:energetic:

I believe the sentiment that connects the thread to the story is "civil rights are a bad thing."

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

marc, what does that have to do with this thread. you really need to connect the dots wee bit more. not all of us can follow your amzing ability to from a to z in one fell swoop.

Daniel

:energetic:

I believe the sentiment that connects the thread to the story is "civil rights are a bad thing."

thanks alex. i'd like to have marc spell it out in hopes maybe he can see the gaps in his 'logic'.

umm or am i way too optimistic?

Daniel

:energetic:

[Alex+R 0]

marc, what does that have to do with this thread. you really need to connect the dots wee bit more. not all of us can follow your amzing ability to from a to z in one fell swoop.

Daniel

:energetic:

I believe the sentiment that connects the thread to the story is "civil rights are a bad thing."

thanks alex. i'd like to have marc spell it out in hopes maybe he can see the gaps in his 'logic'.

umm or am i way too optimistic?

Daniel

:energetic:

Daniel, Marc doesn't have time to explain everything to ignorant people like you. Have some respect.

[Cristy 4]

marc, what does that have to do with this thread. you really need to connect the dots wee bit more. not all of us can follow your amzing ability to from a to z in one fell swoop.

Daniel

:energetic:

I believe the sentiment that connects the thread to the story is "civil rights are a bad thing."

thanks alex. i'd like to have marc spell it out in hopes maybe he can see the gaps in his 'logic'.

umm or am i way too optimistic?

Daniel

:energetic:

Daniel, Marc doesn't have time to explain everything to ignorant people like you. Have some respect.

[Caladan 19]

Civil Rights BAD! Vote Republican!

Child abuse doesn't have anything to do with this topic.

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

marc, what does that have to do with this thread. you really need to connect the dots wee bit more. not all of us can follow your amzing ability to from a to z in one fell swoop.

Daniel

:energetic:

I believe the sentiment that connects the thread to the story is "civil rights are a bad thing."

thanks alex. i'd like to have marc spell it out in hopes maybe he can see the gaps in his 'logic'.

umm or am i way too optimistic?

Daniel

:energetic:

Daniel, Marc doesn't have time to explain everything to ignorant people like you. Have some respect.

what does he expect out of a "liberal dickhead" like me?

Daniel

:energetic:

[Karen_L 1]

ooohhh just had a thought. someone kinda touched on it earlier. the reason I would oppose gay maariage would be if it force my church to marry gays.

i mean gay marriage in a legal sense bothers me not one iota. hell, even for it. but maybe if we can work it out so that churches would not be forced to allow gay marriages then I think most ppl would aggree to it. i think that is the biggest stumbling block.

no?

Daniel

:energetic:

Well, I don't think particular religious groups should be forced to change their stance on any issue; if their doctrines says XYZ is forbidden and followers wish to adhere to that, that's fine. It would be a shame to force a religion to permit something to take place in their holy place that their doctrine doesn't agree with. But I think gay couples should be permitted to have legal civil ceremonies and if they can find a church that will perform a religious ceremony, that's fine too.

[mybackpages 0]

thanks alex. i'd like to have marc spell it out in hopes maybe he can see the gaps in his 'logic'.

umm or am i way too optimistic?

Daniel

:energetic:

the election results have made you giddy....

Civil rights? how far they go? ponder this!

ACLU defends child-molester group

Asks judge to throw out lawsuit against NAMBLA for 10-year-old's murder

This is logic? If i oppose the death penalty, I am soft on crime and feel that serial killers have just had bad childhoods. If i demand the government act in accordance to the constitution then I support child abuse under some belief that it is protected by the cosntitution? oh and yes of course let's nto forget If I vote democrat, I support the terrorist over the American flag.

[Caladan 19]

Daniel, here's the thing. The state has no legal authority to force a religion to do anything (excepting abuse cases), include sanction marriage at all. The worst outcome of your scenario would be something like this: State says to Catholic Church, unless you marry gays, we won't recognize your religious ceremonies as legally binding any more.

That doesn't change the sacrament. It would just mean that there's have to be separate legal and religious ceremonies instead of having them combined.

[mybackpages 0]

Daniel, here's the thing. The state has no legal authority to force a religion to do anything (excepting abuse cases), include sanction marriage at all. The worst outcome of your scenario would be something like this: State says to Catholic Church, unless you marry gays, we won't recognize your religious ceremonies as legally binding any more.

That doesn't change the sacrament. It would just mean that there's have to be separate legal and religious ceremonies instead of having them combined.

Italy now requires couples to have a civil ceremony and will not accept a religious ceremony only. Now this is something that would not go over well with some americans, but Caladan, I think you are right on target as to the extent this could go.

[Caladan 19]

I can't see a politician proposing it. But that would be the extent of it. It wouldn't bother me. To my mind, it's probably best to keep the two separate anyway.