Maine Votes No To Gay Marriage

#76
#76
lumberjack4 said:
535 people making decisions for over 300 million isn't a real representative democracy. I believe that each congressman should represent only 100,000 people instead of almost 600,000. Let states decide their own issues that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the feds.
Click to expand...

That's all fine. I am more speaking of the sort of things that shouldn't even be up for being decided by other people. Just like someone can't be legislated to change religion, no one should be legislated not to practice marriage as long as it is between consenting adults.
 
#77
#77
IPorange said:
That's all fine. I am more speaking of the sort of things that shouldn't even be up for being decided by other people. Just like someone can't be legislated to change religion, no one should be legislated not to practice marriage as long as it is between consenting adults.
Click to expand...

2 issues.

1. Freedom of religion is directly in the Constitution. Marriage definitions are not and gay marriage bans have not been found to be unconstitutional.

2. Practicing marriage and having the government sanction it are two different things.
 
#78
#78
BigPapaVol said:
So we're better represented at 100k? I don't get it. Politicians don't change their stripes becase they represent fewer people. To wit, senators are easily as useless as reps.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It simply brings politicians a litttle closer to the people they claim to represent. It by no means solves any problems, but it is a step in the right direction.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#79
#79
I can't bring myself to think that I am better than anyone else and that I should tell them how to live their lives. I love to hunt, so I. don't want some PETA idiot. telling me I can't.I just think that we are better off with a limited amount of government intervention in our personal lives.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#80
#80
IPorange said:
That's all fine. I am more speaking of the sort of things that shouldn't even be up for being decided by other people. Just like someone can't be legislated to change religion, no one should be legislated not to practice marriage as long as it is between consenting adults.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of trying to legislate morality. While there are several things that morality plays a big part in rape, murder, forcing kids to watch porn, ect. If you are going to legislate something along those lines it should be up to the people that will be affected by it. Personally I would vote for gay marriage if it came to a vote down here.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#82
#82
Sorry for all the periods in the above post. Still getting used to the big thumbs on small keys
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#86
#86
IPorange said:
That's all fine. I am more speaking of the sort of things that shouldn't even be up for being decided by other people. Just like someone can't be legislated to change religion, no one should be legislated not to practice marriage as long as it is between consenting adults.
Click to expand...

Why not let each state decide what marriage is to them? Even states that normally are very far left vote to have marriage between 1 man and 1 woman.
So if a dad wants to marry his daughter you ok with that? Or a brother and sister want to marry?
 
#90
#90
I think the moral of this story is why does anybody give a flying **** if gays want to marry. We certainly have more important things to worry about than this nonsense. This being a driving force in modern politics says alot about our society today.
 
#91
#91
If a state votes no on gay marriage, what's the big deal?? Sounds about right to me, based on percentages of heterosexuals to homosexuals.
 
#93
#93
CountVolcula said:
The problem is if they can bring up a vote on that, what will be next. That is my only concern
Click to expand...

Once again, who cares really?? If people feel the need to vote on it, then they will. This is no different than the people speaking in California on how they felt about the same issue. Yet the courts out there overturned it, and said screw the people. They had a second vote and it was beaten again. The point is, the government shouldn't decide, the people should.
 
#94
#94
g8terh8ter_eric said:
Once again, who cares really?? If people feel the need to vote on it, then they will. This is no different than the people speaking in California on how they felt about the same issue. Yet the courts out there overturned it, and said screw the people. They had a second vote and it was beaten again. The point is, the government shouldn't decide, the people should.
Click to expand...

What if the people decide people with red hair shouldn't be allowed to drive? As long as the people decide it, it's ok?
 
#95
#95
volfanjustin said:
Why not let each state decide what marriage is to them? Even states that normally are very far left vote to have marriage between 1 man and 1 woman.
So if a dad wants to marry his daughter you ok with that? Or a brother and sister want to marry?
Click to expand...

You're comparing homosexuality to incest. Ignorant.
 
#96
#96
g8terh8ter_eric said:
Once again, who cares really?? If people feel the need to vote on it, then they will. This is no different than the people speaking in California on how they felt about the same issue. Yet the courts out there overturned it, and said screw the people. They had a second vote and it was beaten again. The point is, the government shouldn't decide, the people should.
Click to expand...

You are right, there are a lot of people on here that trust lawyers in wrobes more than the people. I would rather the people vote on this issue than 1 judge make this decision.
 
#98
#98
IPorange said:
What if the people decide people with red hair shouldn't be allowed to drive? As long as the people decide it, it's ok?
Click to expand...

Sure. They decided on our President, didn't they?? The people get it right more often than they get it wrong. Besides, how many people in here actually live in Maine and this makes them uncomfortable?? If it doesn't affect you, then what makes it a talking point?? I really have never understood that. The President is doing things that will affect us and our children and their children, but people are calling the people in Maine idiots for what they feel is the right thing to do. It's their right.
 
#99
#99
volinbham said:
2 issues.

1. Freedom of religion is directly in the Constitution. Marriage definitions are not and gay marriage bans have not been found to be unconstitutional.

2. Practicing marriage and having the government sanction it are two different things.
Click to expand...

In regard to 1., no one's personal religious beliefs are being infringed by allowing someone else to get married to another consenting adult. If that is infringing on someone else's beliefs, none of us should be allowed to eat pork. Also, black people being held as slaves was originally not considered unconstitutional. I think in retrospect most would agree it should have been. Segregation wasn't considered unconstitutional either.


In regard to 2., If we truly have an unbiased and theologically ambivalent government (which was supposed to be the case), the government has no right to impose restrictions on consenting adults based on belief systems of others. Many honest Americans will admit that the government shouldn't be involved in marriage whatsoever in the first place. Once someone comes to that conclusion, it's hard to continue to argue that it's "ok" for the government to decide who can and can't get married.
 
#100
#100
IPorange said:
You're comparing homosexuality to incest. Ignorant.
Click to expand...
There was a time in the south where that wasn't so ignorant? I think incest is an abomination, but I can see why you could make the same argument for gay marriage and incest. It doesn't effect other people, right? You may be pro gay marriage, but people definitely have the right to feel like it is wrong.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top