Janes Opinion > Comments on Tolerance? What Tolerance? Do YOU See A Problem With This????

Go to Janes OpinionAdd a commentGo to Tolerance? What Tolerance? Do YOU See A Problem With This????

I meant to say "subjective"

This is religion imposing its morality on the secular world.

That's all it is.  There is nothing outside religion defining marriage.  There are laws, such as Proposition 8, but they are religion based.

I will take up the purpose of marriage in a post.

posted by Xeno-x on November 12, 2008 at 2:31 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Clearly you don't get it. So let me put it in simple terms.
Once they legalized marriage for gays, gays stopped applying for marriage certificates.

Actually, there were over 1300 gay marriages in the Netherlands in '07 (according the Central Bureau of Statistics Netherlands), representing 1.9% of all marriages in the country, a rate that has held fairly constant since about '03.  So, in fact, gays are using the right.

posted by mousehop on November 11, 2008 at 9:30 AM | link to this | reply

Re: I WOULDN'T SAY INTOLERANCE -- BUT MAYBE IT'S ASKING FOR RIGHTS
As to say anyone who isn't angry is not a reasonable person.......nice try....you beat all Barny, ya know?

posted by Corbin_Dallas on November 11, 2008 at 5:36 AM | link to this | reply

I WOULDN'T SAY INTOLERANCE -- BUT MAYBE IT'S ASKING FOR RIGHTS

See, opposition to Gay Marriage is a very  objective thing.  Those of a certain religious preference have a veiw of homosexuality as being sinful (although scriptures really are not that black and white about it).

In so doing, they want to impose their religious preferences on the secular world.  That is what Amendment 8 is.

Any reasonable person would be angry.

posted by Xeno-x on November 11, 2008 at 5:33 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Tolerance and Justice
If civil unions grant all the same legal rights, then what is the actual difference between civil unions and marriage?  I'm a pragmatist; I call things what they are.  If you changed my 'marriage' to a 'civil union', my life would be exactly the same.  So why all the fuss over  the term?

posted by mousehop on November 9, 2008 at 4:57 PM | link to this | reply

heaven forbid, two consenting adults want to be a family. pls. grow up!

posted by muley12 on November 8, 2008 at 10:24 PM | link to this | reply

Re: JANE YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT
Thanks koinonikos.  Glad someone understands the dilemma!!

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:54 PM | link to this | reply

Re:
mordent, I did find it interesting that the same people who voted against homosexual marriage also voted in favor of Obama -- who fervently supports gay marriage. Go figure!

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:54 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Janes Opinion

Amen, Justi!

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:52 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Clearly you don't get it. So let me put it in simple terms.

Clearly PatB, I don't get it.  Why 3% or so of the population must dictate terms for the rest of society. 

Civil unions for gays?  Fine. 

Marriage? No. 

Look at places like the Netherlands. Once they legalized marriage for gays, gays stopped applying for marriage certificates. They want to have their lifestyle validated, but really are not interested in marriage and the commitment it entails. 

Sadly, as -- ammon I think it was -- said, heterosexuals are no longer keeping their commitment to marriage, with 50% ending in divorce.  So the whole sacredness of marriage and the vow of "til death do us part" is losing steam.  Very sad. 

I will always respect people, no matter their sexual preference, the color of their skin or the choice of religion.  Each one of us is created in the image of God.  But I certainly don't have to agree with them. 

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:52 PM | link to this | reply

Re: I Knew I Forgot Something!
Funny, RSM, but I don't see you carrying out all that stuff you mentioned.  You're too good for that!!!

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:43 PM | link to this | reply

Re: JanesO.......
Corbin, thanks for stopping by. I'm with you on this . . . .

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:42 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Tolerance and Justice
mousehop, the "power to define a word"??  That's all that marriage is to you?  Wow!  How sad.  I'm OK w/ civil unions, but believe marriage to be far more sacred than just a "word."

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:42 PM | link to this | reply

Re:

Hi sam, I live in Holland, one of the most conservative areas of MI that consistently votes Republican but which is always outnumbered by the crazy libs in Detroit.

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:40 PM | link to this | reply

Re: But is Prop 8 is tolerant?

Name them, kooka, name them.  Where are conservatives carrying this much looting and vandalism on a scale similar to what's happening in CA?  You always say that, but never give specifics. 

You forget that marriage has been around for 6,000 plus years, and it has always been between a man and a woman.  If gays want to have civil unions, that's fine.  But marriage is a sacred act and should be kept that way. 

posted by JanesOpinion on November 8, 2008 at 7:39 PM | link to this | reply

Hey Jane! I did not know you were from Michigan! My son called yesterday to tell me about the election results for Michigan! I think I should move back and take advantage of the medical marijuana for my headaches! Where in Michigan do you live? I was from Boyne City! sam

posted by sam444 on November 8, 2008 at 3:33 PM | link to this | reply

Tolerance and Justice
In response to Mordent's comment, the reason gays are targeting Mormons is that Mormons put up 40% of the money for the pro Issue 8 campaign, though they make up less than a percentage of the population of California.

I think the anger of gays in understandable, though, like kooka, I agree that vandalism should not be tolerated, and those responsible should be prosecuted.  But denying gays basic civil rights is persecution, plain and simple.  Mormons gain nothing by denying these rights.  All they get is the power to define a word, and to cause suffering in a segment of the population.  Without showing more than a semantic justification for it, denying gays the right to marry while supporting that right for others is immoral and unjust, regardless of how popular it may be.


posted by mousehop on November 8, 2008 at 10:09 AM | link to this | reply

JanesO.......
This whole thing is not about tolerance......we as a nation are quickly willing to tolerate the lifestyle.......the problem is that Americans are being demanded to accept and approve it.   For the Gay Rights activists......tolerance left the field of play years ago.......

I am 100% in favor of giving them  civil unions with full coverage under the law, concerning issues like finances, hospital visitations, property ownership, even child custody.   I just happen to believe that since the dawn of civilization  marriage is between a man and a woman.

posted by Corbin_Dallas on November 8, 2008 at 7:56 AM | link to this | reply

Clearly you don't get it. So let me put it in simple terms.
Equal rights under the law is not "tolerance." It's justice. That's what we all should have, no matter what our ethnicity or sexual orientation.

posted by Pat_B on November 8, 2008 at 7:45 AM | link to this | reply

Hi Jane....
I think it is easy to lose one’s footing on this issue.  The more important thing to concentrate on is the sincerity of marriage.  The divorce rate in conventional marriage is way too high.  Many of the same people who are protesting about preserving the definition of conventional marriage have themselves faltered in such conventional marriages.  Somehow some of us think that we have the right to deny Gays the legal avenue for avowing themselves to one another when so many of us are caught up in adulterous relationships and fail to ourselves honor the bonds of the conventional marriages we are upholding as so sacred.  The larger picture of "commitment" is something that should not be denied to anyone.

posted by ammon on November 8, 2008 at 6:41 AM | link to this | reply

Janes Opinion
After what is being done to Sarah Palin I am ready to call all political alliances off limits. But I was glad to know we could win that one.

posted by Justi on November 7, 2008 at 9:05 PM | link to this | reply

I Knew I Forgot Something!

As a conservative Christian Republican from the South, I was greatly angered Tuesday night at the outcome of the elections. Then I remembered the Book of Revelations must start sometime so...

Then I thought, wait a minute! My candidate did not win! That means that I have the right to riot, loot businesses, burn and pillage the town tonight! I have the right to scream racism at every person of color. Then I remembered what makes me different than a democrat/liberal so I went to bed.

posted by RedStatesMan on November 7, 2008 at 8:39 PM | link to this | reply

That is true!
Bo the wonder dog! He is good! He tolerates me!

posted by Whacky on November 7, 2008 at 8:26 PM | link to this | reply

Yes in my experience I find the leftys to be the least tolerant people.

And as I've said many times the churches are open game to hate and hostility and funny enough prop 8 was mainly destroyed by blacks and hispanics as they are religious and also possess this old world ignorance or tradition depending on who you ask. 

Nevertheless it's the lilly white Mormon church that the gays feel safe attacking.

posted by mordent on November 7, 2008 at 8:18 PM | link to this | reply

JANE YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT
I agree completely with your thoughts. 

posted by koinonikos on November 7, 2008 at 7:08 PM | link to this | reply

But is Prop 8 is tolerant?
Sorry, but when you have something like Prop 8 which is pure intolerance at the highest level, you are going to up set those who's liberties and rights you have tired to take away.  To see a group such as the LDS basically campaign to take away freedoms just because they have 'moral' issue with it, the whole country should be upset and protesting it.
 
I've still yet to find any logic in the anti-gay marriage arguments.  All such ideas do is strip away at the very heart of freedom.
 
As for their actions, just like any group of people there will be those who get carried away with their anger and lash out foolishly.  Don't try to tell me that conservatives never do such things. They have every right to protest outside of the church, and unlike some Christian groups they are not camping out in front of the people's houses. The vandalism and destruction of property is crossing the line and there is no justification for that, but once more you can't say it is a 'liberal' thing because there are incidents of conservative groups doing the same kind of thing.

posted by kooka_lives on November 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM | link to this | reply

Referrals - About Us - Press - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Conduct Policy
Copyright © 2019 Shaycom Corporation. All rights reserved.