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

[mybackpages 0]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

[Carol&Marc 0]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

Coretta speaks for Martin? Okay, Does your husband /wife speak for you? And I certainly NEVER claimed to speak on his behalf! Listen to his speeches! He was a pastor, you think he would be for gay marriage? Show me where HE said that! NOT his family. I love the way some try to rationalize!

[Alex+R 0]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

Coretta speaks for Martin? Okay, Does your husband /wife speak for you? And I certainly NEVER claimed to speak on his behalf! Listen to his speeches! He was a pastor, you think he would be for gay marriage? Show me where HE said that! NOT his family. I love the way some try to rationalize!

I love how some try to hijack Christianity to justify their prejudice. There are many Christians, and pastors for that matter, who don't oppose gay marriage. I think Jesus was a great guy. But not your version of him.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

[Carol&Marc 0]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

Coretta speaks for Martin? Okay, Does your husband /wife speak for you? And I certainly NEVER claimed to speak on his behalf! Listen to his speeches! He was a pastor, you think he would be for gay marriage? Show me where HE said that! NOT his family. I love the way some try to rationalize!

I love how some try to hijack Christianity to justify their prejudice. There are many Christians, and pastors for that matter, who don't oppose gay marriage. I think Jesus was a great guy. But not your version of him.

Alex, how the he!! did you get hijacking christianity from what I said, Jesse Jackson and Al sharpton are the hijackers of MLK! your belly boils in anger. Were there gays in MLK time of course! he never mentioned them because at the time he wasnt thinking of that. he wanted equal rights for blacks! To even say MLK was for gay rights is silly.

I know how it works with you! read what I say, turn it around in your imagination, of what you think I really mean (based on my political views) Then SPIT FIRE! just because of a difference of ideas. This is very common in so called TOLERANT libs. Settle down, make your case and be done with it!

[Alex+R 0]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

Coretta speaks for Martin? Okay, Does your husband /wife speak for you? And I certainly NEVER claimed to speak on his behalf! Listen to his speeches! He was a pastor, you think he would be for gay marriage? Show me where HE said that! NOT his family. I love the way some try to rationalize!

I love how some try to hijack Christianity to justify their prejudice. There are many Christians, and pastors for that matter, who don't oppose gay marriage. I think Jesus was a great guy. But not your version of him.

Alex, how the he!! did you get hijacking christianity from what I said, Jesse Jackson and Al sharpton are the hijackers of MLK! your belly boils in anger. Were there gays in MLK time of course! he never mentioned them because at the time he wasnt thinking of that. he wanted equal rights for blacks! To even say MLK was for gay rights is silly.

I know how it works with you! read what I say, turn it around in your imagination, of what you think I really mean (based on my political views) Then SPIT FIRE! just because of a difference of ideas. This is very common in so called TOLERANT libs. Settle down, make your case and be done with it!

I thought my belly was boiling because of the cheap tacos we ate for dinner... now I know it's because of my as yet unrecognized, yet deep, hatred of people who call themselves conservatives, completely apart from what their ideas may be. Or apart from the fact that they might, as an individual, be a complete and utter inarticulate knuckle dragger...

I never said MLK was pro-gay rights. I said stop saying he wouldn't be because he was a pastor.

[Carol&Marc 0]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

He/she was saying gay groups have the same civil rights as a pedophile groups, the difference is obvious.

The gay rights group have a right to be heard, the pedophile GROUP should not have civil rights as a group their activities are Illegal!

[Karen_L 1]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

Coretta speaks for Martin? Okay, Does your husband /wife speak for you? And I certainly NEVER claimed to speak on his behalf! Listen to his speeches! He was a pastor, you think he would be for gay marriage? Show me where HE said that! NOT his family. I love the way some try to rationalize!

I love how some try to hijack Christianity to justify their prejudice. There are many Christians, and pastors for that matter, who don't oppose gay marriage. I think Jesus was a great guy. But not your version of him.

Alex, how the he!! did you get hijacking christianity from what I said, Jesse Jackson and Al sharpton are the hijackers of MLK! your belly boils in anger. Were there gays in MLK time of course! he never mentioned them because at the time he wasnt thinking of that. he wanted equal rights for blacks! To even say MLK was for gay rights is silly.

I know how it works with you! read what I say, turn it around in your imagination, of what you think I really mean (based on my political views) Then SPIT FIRE! just because of a difference of ideas. This is very common in so called TOLERANT libs. Settle down, make your case and be done with it!

Homosexuality wasn't MLK's issue; racial equality was, so naturally his public statements were mostly in reference to racial issues. But if you read the words to his speeches, they seem to have a broader application.

As to his widow and children speaking for him -- no, they probably don't express what MLK's every opinion would have been, but as his family, as those who presumably knew him best, and who honor and respect his memory and understand the weight of his name, I'm sure they're aware of how responsible they have to be in their public statements, in what they choose to support too.

As for my husband speaking for me -- yes, if I were a public figure and I were to die, I would trust my husband/family to continue my work for me.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

He/she was saying gay groups have the same civil rights as a pedophile groups, the difference is obvious.

I must have missed that..

The gay rights group have a right to be heard, the pedophile GROUP should not have civil rights as a group their activities are Illegal!

Gay rights groups do have a right to be heard - but the general level of prejudice and discrimination they are subjected to (of which issues such as gay marriage is but one example) ranks them slightly above pedophiles in what are broadly classed as "sexual deviants". Other than that there is no comparison.

Edited November 12, 2006 by erekose

[Karen_L 1]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

He/she was saying gay groups have the same civil rights as a pedophile groups, the difference is obvious.

The gay rights group have a right to be heard, the pedophile GROUP should not have civil rights as a group their activities are Illegal!

But this thread isn't about whether NAMBLA has the right to exist; it is about gay marriage, which has nothing to do with NAMBLA. This is why everyone in here is like "What are you talking about, Carol&Mark? We aren't talking about NAMBLA."

[Carol&Marc 0]

I also believe MLK would never approve of what the ACLU involves itself in.

You ought to ask Dr. King's family about that before you go speaking on his behalf. Corretta Scott King and their children are stauch advocates of exactly what you profess they are not. Esp in vocal support of gay marriage

Coretta speaks for Martin? Okay, Does your husband /wife speak for you? And I certainly NEVER claimed to speak on his behalf! Listen to his speeches! He was a pastor, you think he would be for gay marriage? Show me where HE said that! NOT his family. I love the way some try to rationalize!

I love how some try to hijack Christianity to justify their prejudice. There are many Christians, and pastors for that matter, who don't oppose gay marriage. I think Jesus was a great guy. But not your version of him.

Alex, how the he!! did you get hijacking christianity from what I said, Jesse Jackson and Al sharpton are the hijackers of MLK! your belly boils in anger. Were there gays in MLK time of course! he never mentioned them because at the time he wasnt thinking of that. he wanted equal rights for blacks! To even say MLK was for gay rights is silly.

I know how it works with you! read what I say, turn it around in your imagination, of what you think I really mean (based on my political views) Then SPIT FIRE! just because of a difference of ideas. This is very common in so called TOLERANT libs. Settle down, make your case and be done with it!

I thought my belly was boiling because of the cheap tacos we ate for dinner... now I know it's because of my as yet unrecognized, yet deep, hatred of people who call themselves conservatives, completely apart from what their ideas may be. Or apart from the fact that they might, as an individual, be a complete and utter inarticulate knuckle dragger...

I never said MLK was pro-gay rights. I said stop saying he wouldn't be because he was a pastor.

I see taco time must have closed early! I hope you got enough for lunch tomorrow! oooops low blow, feel good? wanna play the hate game? BRING IT!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

He/she was saying gay groups have the same civil rights as a pedophile groups, the difference is obvious.

The gay rights group have a right to be heard, the pedophile GROUP should not have civil rights as a group their activities are Illegal!

But this thread isn't about whether NAMBLA has the right to exist; it is about gay marriage, which has nothing to do with NAMBLA. This is why everyone in here is like "What are you talking about, Carol&Mark? We aren't talking about NAMBLA."

Civil rights? how far they go? ponder this!

Well this was a little ambiguous. I'm probably wrong - but I read that as basically "look what happens when civil rights go too far" - as in homosexuals shouldn't get married because... "all hell will break loose". Somehow

Edited November 12, 2006 by erekose

[peezey 0]

But this thread isn't about whether NAMBLA has the right to exist; it is about gay marriage, which has nothing to do with NAMBLA. This is why everyone in here is like "What are you talking about, Carol&Mark? We aren't talking about NAMBLA."

I don't think anyone here is talking about what Carol&Mark is talking about.

I can't believe this thread has lasted this long.

I can't believe people still think homosexuality is something that actually can be debated. It's not an ideology. Or maybe it is. Holy sh!t!

While you're worrying about the deviance of same-gender relationships and the affects these will have on the potential for polygamy, about a gazillion other more important things have occured, including true threats to life as you know it....like banning smoking in bars!

Edited November 12, 2006 by peezey

[Carol&Marc 0]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

He/she was saying gay groups have the same civil rights as a pedophile groups, the difference is obvious.

The gay rights group have a right to be heard, the pedophile GROUP should not have civil rights as a group their activities are Illegal!

But this thread isn't about whether NAMBLA has the right to exist; it is about gay marriage, which has nothing to do with NAMBLA. This is why everyone in here is like "What are you talking about, Carol&Mark? We aren't talking about NAMBLA."

Geez, It was about the civil rights part of it, I am not against gay people! NAMBLA was an example of the cut off point for civil rights! some of you are trying to connect what I am saying to gays! its strictly about how far civil rights should go!

Edited November 12, 2006 by Carol&Marc

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Is there a point to this - why bring pedophiles into it via the civil rights movement?

He/she was saying gay groups have the same civil rights as a pedophile groups, the difference is obvious.

The gay rights group have a right to be heard, the pedophile GROUP should not have civil rights as a group their activities are Illegal!

But this thread isn't about whether NAMBLA has the right to exist; it is about gay marriage, which has nothing to do with NAMBLA. This is why everyone in here is like "What are you talking about, Carol&Mark? We aren't talking about NAMBLA."

Geez, It was about the civil rights part of it, I am not against gay people! NAMBLA was an example of the cut off point for civil rights! some of you are trying to connect what I am saying to gays! its strictly about how far civil rights should go!

Well if you don't clarify these things... In your interpretation then should civil rights extend as far as gay marriage?