once again...........bush is a douche

though, he doesn't seem to be the only homophobe around.

Adjusting Soapbox

As an interfaith nondenominational minister, I am approached by same sex
couples to perform commitment ceremonies. These people are no different than their heterosexual counterparts. They want to express their love before the divine, and their friends and family.

Being in such a conservative state as North Carolina these couples are so
happy to find me. I've even been told by one women she felt "blessed to
have found me", and I was very honored. Often same sex couples search and search for a member of the clergy willing to unite them before God and Family, sometimes finding me and sometimes finding no one.

I would also like to add that these unions have so much heart that
heterosexual unions often pale in comparison. Family and friends of same sex couples approach me afterwards and thank me so deeply from their hearts for performing the ceremony they are moved to tears. I hear comments like "Thank you so much for doing this for them." or "They
deserved to be together, thank you for agreeing to do the ceremony."

I believe that the Federal Marriage Amendment is unnecessary and wrong.
Even though the country has periodically struggled with the question of marriage -- the last law prohibiting people of different races from marrying was overturned only 35 years ago -- we have never taken the step
of amending the Constitution to define marriage. Now is not the time to
begin to use the Constitution as a tool for discrimination. Congress
certainly has more important issues to consider. The Federal Marriage
Amendment rejects American traditions of life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness. I urge you to oppose this discriminating amendment.

Everyone has the right to the Faith, Love and the Relationship of their choice. One's Life is an expression and
celebration of their relationship with Deity.


Sliding the Soapbox back under my bed.

marriage is just a legal bind.....................the values behind it differ from culture to culture, and from person to person.

The way Republicans talk about it, apparently no one ever got married before Christianity, and the Greek and Roman traditions of homosexual tolerance never existed.

Well the Greek and Roman traditions of tolerance were not towards out and out homosexuality, it was towards bisexuality really. At any rate I really don't understand why these fuckwhits need to tell other people how to live their lives. It's a fucking disgrace. What are they so afraid of?

Well, regardless, they tolerated and even celebrated men fucking other men. You basically couldn't be a good Roman cavalry commander, for example, if you didn't like to fuck dudes. That was the tradition.

What does this have to do with Weapons of Mass Destruction again?

greeks and romans well them thar darned furrners can just go suck each other wee wees in some udder kuntry, we don' need em here in da good ol' US o' A

ok satire out of the way fuck Bush (puns intended ) and again CA are you gonna let MA beat you like this?? From Crescent City to San Ysidro lets show the east coast up and make the Sac lift the ban on same sex marriage.


TKS

what dude?

Gay marriage. No different from traditional marriage.

Yarbrough, a part-time bartender who plans to wear leather pants, tuxedo shirt, and leather vest during the half-hour ceremony, has gotten hitched to Rogahn, a retired school superintendent, first in a civil commitment in Minnesota, then in Canada, and now in Massachusetts, the first U.S. state to recognize gay marriage.

But he says the concept of forever is``overrated'' and that he, as a bisexual, and Rogahn, who is gay, have chosen to enjoy an open marriage. ``I think it's possible to love more than one person and have more than one partner, not in the polygamist sense,'' he said.``In our case, it is, we have, an open marriage.''

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=28184

Anecdotal evidence + not your business + not my business + definitely not the State's business + ABSOLUTELY NOT the Federal Government's business + heterosexuals do the same things (hello, Vegas?) + who gives a shit?

I'm not sure what the point of this is.

leather pants dude....................awesomerific

almost all my straight married friends have open marriages. we're the minority. we also live next to a lesbian couple who've been together forever and don't appear to wear leather pants. i guess my experience cancels stocky's post out. now we can get back to the topic at hand.

actually, stockula, it is no different than straight marriage. several married straight couples i know are in open marriages, and it's hardly a phenomenon that's specific to san francisco or homosexuals. shall i interview them and post a quote from a website about how their decision to choose an open marriage has strengthened their (straight) relationships?

straight couples of all ages and walks of life choose open marriages. there are plenty of books, newsletters, online communities, and so forth on the subject.

all you're doing here is regurgitating the myth that homosexuals are promiscuous, and therefore too immoral to choose marriage. however, heterosexuals are equally as promiscuous, and infidelity is highly common among married straights. furthermore, i could easily trot out articles about gays who announce their intention to be completely monogamous until death do them part.

regardless, the government has no place poking around the bedrooms of consenting adults.