usvi-on-line
DELETED
For me, STJ is a haven away from the day to day turmoil and issues that impact my life.... a respite from the world that contains far too much hate!
I wish this board could be the same! I yearn for a time when people are caring and accepting and realizing that we don't have to believe the same thing to get along.
I wish this board could be the same! I yearn for a time when people are caring and accepting and realizing that we don't have to believe the same thing to get along.
-
sailorgirl
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:03 pm
Come on now! If you seriously believe this had to do with same sex marriage I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in purchasing. This had nothing to do with same sex marriage and everything to do with allowing one party to regain control of the legeslature which it held for four decades and lost surprisingly in the last election. And if we are looking for poster boys for moralitly the two legislators who " switched sides" are hardly the best choice. One is under indictment for beating his girlfriend and the other under investigation for improprities at a health care agency he runs. One of the switchers was promplty rewarded by being appointed to a leadership position in the Senate. Dean Skelos, the new majority leader sat paitently in the wings for 20 years waiting for the former majority leader Joe Bruno to retire. Once Bruno was forced out of office last fall Skelos stepped into the post he has been waiting his whole carrer for, just to lose it in a matter of months when the baalnce shifted. That's what this is all about, plain and simple.SJfromNJ wrote:You make it sound like all same sex relationships stay intact. In fact in Europe where same sex marriage has been legal for a while, the divorce rate is similar to hetersexual marriage.
Like I said, I also beleive it should be up to the states to decide. It is very interesting that now for the first time because of this issue, politicians have jumped ship from their party. NY, surprising indeed!
To support sailorgirl’s point and at the risk of extending this now tiresome topic:
SJ - I’m also confused by the motivation for your post. You make it sound like the primary impetus for the switch was gay marriage. I cant find anything substantial that supports that premise. Perhaps this is some hypothesis fostered by Fox, Rush, or some other 3G source that you empathize with? (3G = the God/Guns/Gays litmus test folks) Seems like the primary reason for the switch was folks with lots of money twisting the arms of a couple of ethically challenged state senate members to help derail the proposals to increase taxes on the rich (typical).
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/nyreg ... ml?_r=1&hp
Are you referring to this radio interview with the new state senate president who in one sentence said he wants to bring it to a vote then in another says he is FOR same sex marriage? And the gay rights folks say yes, bring it on, even after the coup?
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ... -marriage/
The Post and Daily News had similar stories. So, I don’t get the reason for your post, other than to stretch something in order to stir the pot AGAIN on a pet topic. You need to fish with some better quality bait. This one wasnt worth the nibbles it received.
SJ - I’m also confused by the motivation for your post. You make it sound like the primary impetus for the switch was gay marriage. I cant find anything substantial that supports that premise. Perhaps this is some hypothesis fostered by Fox, Rush, or some other 3G source that you empathize with? (3G = the God/Guns/Gays litmus test folks) Seems like the primary reason for the switch was folks with lots of money twisting the arms of a couple of ethically challenged state senate members to help derail the proposals to increase taxes on the rich (typical).
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/nyreg ... ml?_r=1&hp
Are you referring to this radio interview with the new state senate president who in one sentence said he wants to bring it to a vote then in another says he is FOR same sex marriage? And the gay rights folks say yes, bring it on, even after the coup?
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ... -marriage/
The Post and Daily News had similar stories. So, I don’t get the reason for your post, other than to stretch something in order to stir the pot AGAIN on a pet topic. You need to fish with some better quality bait. This one wasnt worth the nibbles it received.
When we come to place where the sea and the sky collide
Throw me over the edge and let my spirit glide
Throw me over the edge and let my spirit glide
-
aroobagirl
- Posts: 316
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:58 pm
- Location: Fairfax, VA
All Opposed to Gay Marriage:
Unless a homosexual is trying to force you into a same sex marriage I don't see why you should have any say in their rights. (Perhaps gays shouldn't pay taxes since they aren't afforded the same rights?) I was taught that the US was founded on religious freedom and that there is a separation between church and state. Not all Americans are "Christians" and to force your religious beliefs on others is essentially anti-American.
Open your mind and heart, now that would be Christ-like.
Unless a homosexual is trying to force you into a same sex marriage I don't see why you should have any say in their rights. (Perhaps gays shouldn't pay taxes since they aren't afforded the same rights?) I was taught that the US was founded on religious freedom and that there is a separation between church and state. Not all Americans are "Christians" and to force your religious beliefs on others is essentially anti-American.
Open your mind and heart, now that would be Christ-like.
really even those opposed to homosexuality should be for same sex marriage...if there was same sex marriage, then "partners" benefits could be taken away.
can opposite sex "partners" get health insurance through their partner?
and then everyone has to make a real commitment-marriage- with real ramifications to dissolving it before they could get marriage "benefits" like health care or whatever.
it would be more equal across the board-everyone treated the same legally.
to me there is a difference between legal marriage and church marriage. if a church decides not to perform same sex marriages, fine! that is their choice, their deal.
yes, I am a conservative, but I think this is a no brainer.
can opposite sex "partners" get health insurance through their partner?
and then everyone has to make a real commitment-marriage- with real ramifications to dissolving it before they could get marriage "benefits" like health care or whatever.
it would be more equal across the board-everyone treated the same legally.
to me there is a difference between legal marriage and church marriage. if a church decides not to perform same sex marriages, fine! that is their choice, their deal.
yes, I am a conservative, but I think this is a no brainer.
"Sponges grow in the ocean...I wonder how much deeper it would be if that didn't happen."
Sounds like the Mel Gibson brand of Christianity. Remember Mr. "the Catholic Church is not Catholic enough for me" and I have to build my own church and we should go back to Vatican 1. Oh, right, but Mel is getting a divorce from his wife of what 3 decades and has a baby on the way with his mistress.
Hmmmm....me thinks some people should stop worrying so much about gay marriage and worry more about themselves or other issues that are far more detrimental to the "sanctity of marriage." Until I hear that coming out, it all sounds a bit like BS to me and self-righteousness. Do as I say not as I do.
Whether or not same sex couples will divorce at the same rate as hetero couples is irrelevant. How can we deny a right to citizens of this country, based on nothing more than a moral/Christian belief, when those who do enjoy the right to marry treat it more often than not as a revolving door?
But the courts allow it, the law allows it, so its ok. Hmmmmmm....either its a steadfast moral issue or not. You can't have it both ways.
Hmmmm....me thinks some people should stop worrying so much about gay marriage and worry more about themselves or other issues that are far more detrimental to the "sanctity of marriage." Until I hear that coming out, it all sounds a bit like BS to me and self-righteousness. Do as I say not as I do.
Whether or not same sex couples will divorce at the same rate as hetero couples is irrelevant. How can we deny a right to citizens of this country, based on nothing more than a moral/Christian belief, when those who do enjoy the right to marry treat it more often than not as a revolving door?
But the courts allow it, the law allows it, so its ok. Hmmmmmm....either its a steadfast moral issue or not. You can't have it both ways.
-
sailorgirl
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:03 pm
No! And I think you miss my point. I don't believe same sex marraige has anything to do with it at all. This was not about where one stands on the issue either for or against. It was a power grab. If you are looking for a group of people to take a stand on principle on any issue, then you best look somewhere else other than the NY State Legislature! Sorry, I might be cynical, but I am a realist.SJfromNJ wrote:sailorgirl - Perhaps you are right. Both sides are spinning it different ways, we will see how it shakes out shortly. The timing seems to suggest the same sex marriage vote had a lot to do with it, don't ya think?
-
sailorgirl
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:03 pm
As to why now... why not now. I think you may be making a temporal connection between two events rather than an causal connection. Perhaps because it is an isue which holds more signifcance for you than others.
Well I can only say that I hope with all of the really signifcant issues facing my legislature this term, they would not get bogged down in something, which in my view is as collateral as same sex marriage.
Well I can only say that I hope with all of the really signifcant issues facing my legislature this term, they would not get bogged down in something, which in my view is as collateral as same sex marriage.
Nope because Lex started the “Iowa is a surprising place” thread based on the fact that something SIGNIFICANT regarding gay marriage actually happened there, and in a place you might not expect it, whereas this thread struck me as just a weak attempt to stir that pot again.SJfromNJ wrote:jmq- Do you want to indite LEX of the same charges you have charged me with?
Oh OK - a Fox news affiliate put that spin on it, and nobody else picked it up. Got it.SJfromNJ wrote:They reported this as a possibility on the local Fox news in NY which is very liberal as is most of the media in NY.
And I'm not indicting you - just sayin it's a stretch and folks should realize when they're being baited just for the sake of it. But some enjoy that dance anyway and will indulge you, so, by all means, carry on.
When we come to place where the sea and the sky collide
Throw me over the edge and let my spirit glide
Throw me over the edge and let my spirit glide
I like the way you think!byado18 wrote:For me, STJ is a haven away from the day to day turmoil and issues that impact my life.... a respite from the world that contains far too much hate!
I wish this board could be the same! I yearn for a time when people are caring and accepting and realizing that we don't have to believe the same thing to get along.
Maybe I will see you on the beach. I'll be the one hobbling along. I wrecked my foot last week--such bad timing. As long as I can jam my fin on it, it will be OK.
It's like looking in your soup and finding a whole different alphabet.