Australia to outlaw gay marriage

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-27 11:06am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
No, Crackpot, what I'm going from is news reports from around these fifty states. But that would ruin your preconceived notions, so you attack like a rabid little monkey.
the news reports about the pro gay marriage/civil union laws being slowly worked through the legislatures in states like California, New York, Vermont, Hawaii, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire? We are making progress asswhipe, stop portraying the whole fucking country like the hick fundies in the south!

Hey retard boy: You will notice that any phrases indicating that are conspicuously lacking from my posts. I already pointed this out first, but it simply made you try and fail to use fallacies. You do know that saying 'Uh, uh, you're in the south, you have to be wrong!!!!!1111oneoneoneeleven' is a fallacy, right? Or are you just not that bright?

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-27 11:07am

Jesus Crackpot, do yourself a favour and re-read the thread.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-05-27 11:08am

Colonel Olrik wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote: the laws are changing here too! just because vocal fundies oppose the change doesn't mean it won't happen!
So, you're conceding that the US is not boldly leading the world into a bright new future of freedom of choice, but following the other 1st world nations and hoping not to trip because the POTUS and I believe the majority of its population are christian fundamentalists who want to change the Constitution. Gotcha.

i said we were AMONG the leaders of the pack, not that we were. read my post. And don't fucking sterotype the whole fucking US because the president and some vocal religious freaks are fundies.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-05-27 11:11am

Col. Crackpot wrote: no two nations: Belgium and the Netherlands. And Yes the state of Massachusetts is more progressive than the totality of Europe with regards to gay marriage.
And my claim is not utter bullcrap, Just because you like in a backwards, redneck, trodgelite sisterfucking state, doen't mean that your narrow sampling of the country is indicative of the rest of the country.

And how much support does same-sex marriage have outside of Mass. ?
Name 10 states that you think will have same-sex marriage in 2008.

But at least you no longer claim that the US and the UK "leads the way" on same-sex marriage.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-27 11:12am

Crackpot contends that the majority of America wants Gay Marriage. Allow me to present some proof to the contrary, a CNN article mentioning the polls that show the majority are against it.

CNN Linky

We now await Crackpot actually posting proof to back up his claims. Get your lawn-chairs folks, we may be a while.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-05-27 11:16am

SirNitram wrote:Crackpot contends that the majority of America wants Gay Marriage. Allow me to present some proof to the contrary, a CNN article mentioning the polls that show the majority are against it.

CNN Linky

We now await Crackpot actually posting proof to back up his claims. Get your lawn-chairs folks, we may be a while.

where did i ever say that a majority of americans in every state support gay marriage? I DIDN'T! I said that it has support in several key states. You see, unlike the tiny postage stamp countries that support gay marriage th US has 300 million people with varying beliefs. it takes time to change those beliefs, just like it took time in the 60's to enact civil rights laws. DON'T TWIST MY WORDS FUCKER!

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2004-05-27 11:17am

Col. Crackpot wrote: i said we were AMONG the leaders of the pack, not that we were. read my post. And don't fucking sterotype the whole fucking US because the president and some vocal religious freaks are fundies.

You mean this post?

you wrote:how many countries allow gay marriage nationwide? Lets review the list:

1: the republic of nowhere

The fact that gay marriage is allowed in any part of the US proves that, Along with Canada and the UK we are at the front of the pack with regards to dealing with this issue.

Which pack were you refering to? Zimbabwe & Co? Not to mention Nr 1.

And about sterotype, who do you think has more coverage in the world: The average american atheists or the progressive american administration?

Do you know how strange it feels to an european to hear "God bless america" at the end of every speech? If the population was half as secular as in the EU, that phrase would never be uttered, not by a lowly public official, much less from a president of a nation.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-27 11:17am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
SirNitram wrote:Crackpot contends that the majority of America wants Gay Marriage. Allow me to present some proof to the contrary, a CNN article mentioning the polls that show the majority are against it.

CNN Linky

We now await Crackpot actually posting proof to back up his claims. Get your lawn-chairs folks, we may be a while.

where did i ever say that a majority of americans in every state support gay marriage? I DIDN'T! I said that it has support in several key states. You see, unlike the tiny postage stamp countries that support gay marriage th US has 300 million people with varying beliefs. it takes time to change those beliefs, just like it took time in the 60's to enact civil rights laws. DON'T TWIST MY WORDS FUCKER!

YOU tell someone not to twist YOUR words? I'm sorry, no, you ignorant peice of shit. You're the one whose been claiming I've said the US is a fundie hole, which, as I have repeatedly pointed out, WAS NEVER SAID. Maybe if you'd stop acting like a troll for ten minutes, you'd realize that.

Now run along and backpedal some more, you useless little shitstain.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-05-27 11:19am

Colonel Olrik wrote: you know how strange it feels to an european to hear "God bless america" at the end of every speech? If the population was half as secular as in the EU, that phrase would never be uttered, not by a lowly public official, much less from a president of a nation.

ohhh yeah, after all he is the exact representative of every American.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-05-27 11:20am

Col. Crackpot wrote: i said we were AMONG the leaders of the pack, not that we were. read my post. And don't fucking sterotype the whole fucking US because the president and some vocal religious freaks are fundies.

you said:

you wrote:how many countries allow gay marriage nationwide? Lets review the list:

1: the republic of nowhere

The fact that gay marriage is allowed in any part of the US proves that, Along with Canada and the UK we are at the front of the pack with regards to dealing with this issue.

Canada have a valid claim.

The US does show progress but not enough to be labelled to be a leader
by ANY stretch of the imagination.

The UK have not even introduced civil unions yet!

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-05-27 11:21am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote: you know how strange it feels to an european to hear "God bless america" at the end of every speech? If the population was half as secular as in the EU, that phrase would never be uttered, not by a lowly public official, much less from a president of a nation.
ohhh yeah, after all he is the exact representative of every American.

No. He is your Commander in Chief of your armed forces, you Head of State and your Head of Government ...

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-05-27 11:21am

you know what, fuck this, and fuck you. believe what you want to believe. i have to go back to work.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2004-05-27 11:22am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote: you know how strange it feels to an european to hear "God bless america" at the end of every speech? If the population was half as secular as in the EU, that phrase would never be uttered, not by a lowly public official, much less from a president of a nation.
ohhh yeah, after all he is the exact representative of every American.

No, the mere fact that he was put in charge and is allowed to say it in speeches is more than enough evidence how the average (read majority of) american thinks.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-27 11:22am

Col. Crackpot wrote:you know what, fuck this, and fuck you. believe what you want to believe. i have to go back to work.

Do come back when you mature enough to actually debate without furiously backpedalling constantly and tossing out insults to try and damage your opponent's credibility. If, you know, you ever pass puberty.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-27 11:39am

SirNitram wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:you know what, fuck this, and fuck you. believe what you want to believe. i have to go back to work.
Do come back when you mature enough to actually debate without furiously backpedalling constantly and tossing out insults to try and damage your opponent's credibility. If, you know, you ever pass puberty.

Quit it you smarmy little asshole. Your cowardly putdowns lost their charm 2 years ago. You know full well Crackpot is a married man and though he straw maned don't go talking to him like that, especially as it looks like he's down and you're kicking him on the floor. Why do I get the feeling you're making up for a youger life of being bullied, by trying to be an online bully? Fucker.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-05-27 11:47am

Do my eyes decieve me? Shirtless and Crackpot in a mutual admiration and sacrificial society? What planet am I on?

And Shirtless, shut the fuck up. Crackpot dragged out a simple fucking thread to 3 pages for no other reason than his own hubris. Personally I was tempted to flush most of this shit to HoS, but it is a quater to 2 in the morning here, and I have a headache.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-05-27 11:53am

Crown wrote:Do my eyes decieve me? Shirtless and Crackpot in a mutual admiration and sacrificial society? What planet am I on?

And Shirtless, shut the fuck up. Crackpot dragged out a simple fucking thread to 3 pages for no other reason than his own hubris. Personally I was tempted to flush most of this shit to HoS, but it is a quater to 2 in the morning here, and I have a headache.

You wouldn't kick a man on the floor Crown. Sorry, but I hate that. Feel free to flush this shit.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-27 01:10pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:you know what, fuck this, and fuck you. believe what you want to believe. i have to go back to work.
Do come back when you mature enough to actually debate without furiously backpedalling constantly and tossing out insults to try and damage your opponent's credibility. If, you know, you ever pass puberty.
Quit it you smarmy little asshole. Your cowardly putdowns lost their charm 2 years ago. You know full well Crackpot is a married man and though he straw maned don't go talking to him like that, especially as it looks like he's down and you're kicking him on the floor. Why do I get the feeling you're making up for a youger life of being bullied, by trying to be an online bully? Fucker.

I see another fine member of the internet community doesn't realize that there's a fine line between physical maturity and mental and emotional maturity. You know, the things that cause people to drag out three pages of nonsense because it offends their sensibilities that they might be wrong. Run along.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-05-27 01:19pm

SecondStorm wrote:And how much support does same-sex marriage have outside of Mass. ?
Name 10 states that you think will have same-sex marriage in 2008.

California, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Hawaii, Rhode Island and New Jersey. And if SCOTUS tosses out the DOMA, the other 40 will have to recognize gay marriages from those states.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-05-27 01:26pm

RedImperator wrote:
SecondStorm wrote:And how much support does same-sex marriage have outside of Mass. ?
Name 10 states that you think will have same-sex marriage in 2008.
California, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Hawaii, Rhode Island and New Jersey. And if SCOTUS tosses out the DOMA, the other 40 will have to recognize gay marriages from those states.

Im pleasantly surprised.

Source?

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-05-27 03:16pm

SecondStorm wrote:
RedImperator wrote:
SecondStorm wrote:And how much support does same-sex marriage have outside of Mass. ?
Name 10 states that you think will have same-sex marriage in 2008.
California, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Hawaii, Rhode Island and New Jersey. And if SCOTUS tosses out the DOMA, the other 40 will have to recognize gay marriages from those states.
Im pleasantly surprised.
Source?

Nothing but my own knowledge of American politics, sadly. VT already has civil unions. CA, NY, NH, HI, RI, OR, NJ and CT (I forgot Connecticut in my list above) should in the next few years. Washington and Minnesota are mostly guesses, but they're among the most liberal states in the union. '08 is a little early, but by '10 I'd be very surprised if these ten didn't have fully recognized gay marriage.

Of course I could be wrong on some (and a state I didn't list might leave me pleasantly surprised), but I was under the impression you were asking for an educated guess, not an actual promise (which would be impossible for anyone to give).

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-05-27 04:03pm

RedImperator wrote: Nothing but my own knowledge of American politics, sadly. VT already has civil unions. CA, NY, NH, HI, RI, OR, NJ and CT (I forgot Connecticut in my list above) should in the next few years. Washington and Minnesota are mostly guesses, but they're among the most liberal states in the union. '08 is a little early, but by '10 I'd be very surprised if these ten didn't have fully recognized gay marriage.

Of course I could be wrong on some (and a state I didn't list might leave me pleasantly surprised), but I was under the impression you were asking for an educated guess, not an actual promise (which would be impossible for anyone to give).

An educated guess was what I wanted.
And I hope your right.

But will it be civil unions like Vermont or actual marriage?
Civil Union might be more easy to swallow for many Americans but should the gay community settle with that ?

(This is somewhat off-topic as this thread is about Australia not America/Europe)

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-05-27 04:29pm

Actually, my position is that they should strike the word marriage from the civil code entirely. Any two people of any combination of genders can enter a "civil union" which carried the exact same rights, privledges, and responsibilities as a civil marriage. They can feel free to call themselves married, or go get married before God in church, or whatever they want to do afterwards.

As for what's actually going to happen in reality, I suspect "civil unions" are just a transition phase to full marriage for gays. As long as a civil union carries the same legal status as a marriage, it's really just a matter of semantics anyway.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2004-05-27 04:57pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
SirNitram wrote: You know, if someone had actually written that about the US, you'd have actual credibility.
maybe if you stuck your head out of the hillbilly coalmines of West Virginia once in a while you'd realize that most of the country isn't like that.

Hate to tell you this Crackpot, but West Virginia is a good pulse point for the Conservative Religious Majority. There is a reason why this area's called the Belt Buckle of the Bible Belt.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-27 07:34pm

RedImperator wrote:As for what's actually going to happen in reality, I suspect "civil unions" are just a transition phase to full marriage for gays. As long as a civil union carries the same legal status as a marriage, it's really just a matter of semantics anyway.

If it carries the same legal status, then why shouldn't a gay person be able to tell people he's married? The idea of having two terms for the same concept is such a complete waste of time.