"Get the government out of the marriage business" - Another lie by the liberals.

Yes, I'm with you.

We did put the kids in Christian school as long as we could afford it.
They did a great job.
After hard times, we couldn't afford it anymore.
LaPage, and the Republicans have been saying vouchers for schools.
It may be a little late for us, but sounds like it would help others.
Or it maybe just more promises of "hope and change", I don't know.
Either way, the fact that so few people's ideas can influence so many people without their say is disturbing.
The schools should be ashamed of themselves for telling my kids, they can't bring a certain "Christian" shirt, but wear a gay pride bracelet.
They push this crap on us.
Your right though, I should be at those meetings.

All this is nice. But Bob E. essentally says it best IMHO.
In life there are things that are different and because they are they are not discriminatory.
Marriage man and women.
Man and Man ,Women and Women can have what ever they want to call it ,but it isn't a marriage !
No need to redefine .

Burdock, people need to start working at the local levels. Recruit candidates for city council seats and school board seats. Recruit people and make time to work to get them elected.

I pay taxes and help pay for my grandsons private education. I am paying twice. ~Bob S

Unless you have no life or live off a trust fund, it's very difficult to attend every board meeting or even be on the board. It takes up a LOT of time and I believe this is by design...and not "for the children".

Bob, I have no children in any school system yet I have to pay (dearly) for the little darlings to be educated. How do you think I feel? It's a hell of a socialist program they have going there....but "IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN"!

Personally, I think the entire cost should be on the backs of those whose children attend the schools, not everyone in the geographic region...but that's another topic for another time.

Jeepn, most Republicans have no problem with that kind of socialism.

"yet I have to pay (dearly) for the little darlings to be educated."

Don't you mean indoctrinated?

You mean most 'people' have no problem with that kind of socialism, right? I am curious as to why you would mention Republicans specifically.

I disagree people have no problem with it, there is just nothing anyone can do about it. It's a far cry different from using taxes to support governmental services...a FAR cry.

Yes, most people.

I specified Republicans because this forum is primarily Republican, and this thread seems particularly Republican :) It's also not hypocritical for those Democrats who admit they like socialism to support government education.

Glad to hear you think people on here would support ending the public school system though...

I checked, Bob. Found out that I was right. :)

A societies have always defined it as the union of a man and a woman.

I agree with Bob Emrich.

Elsewhere, I have argued that the question of "gay marriage" is only marginally about rights and mostly about the power of a dominant elite to make a more "rational" society.

It is not a function of government, even that of a participatory democracy, to revise the dictionnary.

It's pretty ironic that the gays say "get government out of the marriage business", but then will run screaming to the government when they encounter the smallest imagined slight. You know the types. "The cashier in the bakery sneered when we asked for a wedding cake. So they should be put out of business." Gays are the biggest victims on the Democrat side right now, followed closely by people that don't want to get an Id so they can vote multiple times.

It's pretty ironic that the gays say "get government out of the marriage business",

Liberals have no intention of getting the government out of anything. The only reason they make that statement is to confuse the gullible.

It's just another liberal lie.

I think we have a winner!

Maybe it's time to get religion out of the legal contract business. I was married by a judge, no religious connotations what so ever, and divorced by another.

charlie

I think we have a winner, Charlie!

Wait a minute.... So now it's "marriage should be solely the province of government"?

One of us is confused.

I think there is an "anti-religious" sentiment that trumps your anti-government sentiment.

It is not a legal contract or even a marriage until the state (or the town) signs and certifies the paperwork.

It is not a legal contract or even a marriage until the state (or the town) signs and certifies the paperwork.

And you don't find a problem with this?

It's pretty ironic that the gays say "get government out of the marriage business", but then will run screaming to the government when they encounter the smallest imagined slight. ~Apollo

Bingo, that is right on the money and couldn't get any better.

Interesting thread that starts with the premise that supporters of gay marriage want government out of the marriage business. Nice claim, but I've never heard a supporter say that. In fact, supporters of gay marriage are more likely to claim that marriage is the government's business. That's why it makes sense for them to use government to make their unions legal. It's usually the opponents of gay marriage who say they want government out of the marriage business because to them it's a religious institution.
So once the false premise is laid out, the whole thread is based on that false statement. From the government's perspective, marriage is a civil ceremony that confers rights and responsibilities to those who get married. It's usually conservatives who claim that it's more than that, not liberals.

Interesting thread that starts with the premise that supporters of gay marriage want government out of the marriage business. Nice claim, but I've never heard a supporter say that.

Absurd on it's face.

1. Does anyone say: "Get the government out of the marriage business"?

If no - STOP HERE THE STATEMENT IS UNTRUE.

If yes:

2. Are those that are saying it, supporting gay marriage?

IF TRUE< STATEMENT IS TRUE>

END.

Another way of looking at it would be to Google the phrase: "Get the government out of the marriage business". You will come up with about 84,000 hits - many SUPPORTING gay marriage.

Secondly, many people saying it fall into two groups:

1. Deceitful liberals, who DO want the government in marriage, and are trying to confuse some soft-headed libertarian-types.

2. Soft-headed libertarian-types who support the current efforts to pass gay marriage, without thinking the consequences through.

Anyway, why the gravestone and black crow?

Bob S - "And you don't find a problem with this?"

I was not stating an opinion one way or the other - only trying to clarify an earlier point someone made.

Bob, I wanted to ask something. I get the emails from Protect Marriage Maine. I'd like to give some money to them, but are their contributors information public? The gay militant movement hunted down, harrassed, and made death threats against people in Massachusetts, California, and other places for contributing money to traditional marriage ballot issues. I suppose to get around it, I could just get $500 in cash and take it down to the Protect Marriage Maine office and give it anonymously.

Apollo,
If you give more than $50, your contribution will be public. There is a chance you will be harassed, etc. but it is not so bad. You get used to it after a while. Then you get a concealed carry permit. If people avoid giving because of the threats, they win. It takes a little courage to stand for what is right.

Send a big check to: Protect Marriage Maine, PO Box 288, Augusta, ME 04330. That will teach them :)
If you try to give $500 cash without the appropriate information, they will not take it.

Ok I'll ask again.
Why are we still having to vote on this again?
Why are we still having to make this an issue?
Not sure about Maine's numbers, but overall the US is- maybe 2% are gay.
That's being very liberal on the numbers towards them.
So we 98% have to hear it why?
Now, (not going to give a percentage) we average folk are mostly Christian.
Even the founders of the country where Christian.
So why the assault on everyday thoughts?

Most of us, would salute the flag or say the pledge of the elegance.
But, that's not allowed anymore- in schools.
Maybe some of us adults, are not inclined to use seat belts.
But, now we have to.
Maybe some us who pay our debts- expect our town or government to do the same.
No, why would you want to do that?

So I ask again "What would Bush do".
I'm not a huge fan, just that the "don't ask don't tell" was working for me.
Why does it need to be in our face all the time and come home w/ our kids?
Most of us really don't care, what you do behind closed doors.
Keep it to yourself.

The Marriage thing is the same, "one man for one woman"- I agree.
Go after civil union.
Why do you need to insult the majority belief?
You could simply ask for the benefits, and be married by the courts.
You can't stop there though?
You need to insult us.

I will vote against this again, as I have before.

If the liberals don't get the correct out come.
They pound it again and again until they get their way.
My 3 year old did the same.

1. Does anyone say: "Get the government out of the marriage business"?

Yes, I do.

2. Are those that are saying it, supporting gay marriage?

I will be voting no. I will vote against any further government involvement into the lives of private citizens.

2. Soft-headed libertarian-types who support the current efforts to pass gay marriage, without thinking the consequences through.

The above statement tells me that you are very insecure in who you are and feel the need to drag people down to your level, or, you are having thoughts of latent homosexuality. Which is it Tom? ;-)

Bob S- too funny :)

The reason we have to vote on homosexual marriage is because it won't be settled law until the homosexuals get what they want. The bigger question will be, what happens when the homosexual marriage is defeated again ?

The above statement tells me that you are very insecure in who you are and feel the need to drag people down to your level, or, you are having thoughts of latent homosexuality. Which is it Tom? ;-)

If you followed my posts closely, (not TOO closely, or I'll have you arrested) you would know that I am a 400 pound handicapped African-American transvesite.

Now, just because I'm gay doesn't mean I have to be for gay marriage.

Well Tom, I guess intelligent dialog is out of the question.

Well, if it wasn't before, your silly "insecure or latently homosexual" put it out there.