Oh really? Like the time the courts said it was ok to intern anyone of Japanese descent during WWII? Or today when a minority who likes to consume drugs gets thrown into jail for a victimless crime by a majority? As for our constitutions protecting minorities…lol…don’t you know that the government doesn’t pay any attention to that piece of paper anymore? They are about to throw a minority, Plexico Buress, in jail for carrying a gun without a permit…majority tyranny over the minority…and that right is enshrined in the 2nd amendment…he didn’t even harm anyone else…WTF?!

“It was the courts that gave the rights, NOT the people.”

Courts gave rights to people? Wait, isn’t it the people who give rights to the courts, and not the other way around? We the people have inalienable rights…if the courts do not want to recognize that, then they are operating outside the law, not within it.

If the people don’t have rights, and the courts give them rights…how do they do that? Where do the courts receive the power to bestow rights upon people?

The whole gay marriage debate is stupid. There should be no marriage debate. Why is the government even involved in marriage in the first place?

Marriage is between two individuals, who love each other and want to make a commitment to one another…some think they need a church to sanction it, others believe they need the government to sanction it…but in the end, wtf..

Why do we need a government official to sanction marriage?! The government shouldn’t be in the marriage business in the first place, and the only reason gays want “the right to marry” is because they want a piece of the action: more rights, more tax breaks, more government enforced privileges…what about single people?

Do single people not deserve a tax break? A tax break for married couples, gay or straight, is a tax hike for single people…screw that…that is ridiculous. Just because married people were wrong for asking for a handout from government, now gays think they can get in line and ask for one as well? Nope, unless you want to extend the same privileges to EVERYONE, regardless of marital status (which would totally ruin the privileged status of married as far as governmental privilege is concerned) then the gay marriage movement is not about CIVIL RIGHTS, it is about another special interest handout.

Stop calling special interest handouts, CIVIL RIGHTS. They are not…gays want a part of this:

http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/ObjectID/E0366844-7992-4018-B581C6AE9BF8B045/catID/F896EE61-B80C-4FE1-B1687AC0F07903BA/118/304/ART/

“tax benefits, estate planning benefits, and government benefits”…this is bullshit…single people and gays are getting screwed over. The solution? Divest the married people of their preferential treatment…don’t add yourself to the plunder at the expense of groups not within your special designation of “marriage”.

NH WPOM

It’s as if I used the word “nigger” to describe a person of ignorance…

And you still refuse to answer any of the questions I posed. And you have now TWICE called me bigot. At first I took great offense to that but it is clear now that you don’t know what a bigot is. It must be a new word you learned.

So let me make it a little easier for you,

Bigot - Noun -
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

Seems like that applies to you more than it does me. You are the one against gay “marriage”. You also seem to be bothered about any “opinion” I have.

The bottom line here is that you are fighting/debating a word based on a religious principles and not the rule of law. If this issue isn’t a violation of church and state, I don’t know what is… and I will never understand.

Again… its NOT THE WORD… ITS THE RIGHTS. Had “civil unions” had the same rights as marriage than there would be no problems.

For you it is about the word, for gay people it is about EQUAL rights.

Religion isn’t reasoned; it is faith. This country is also a religious entity though separated by a wise constitution. Marriage has long had a religious component. Before the gay marriage brouhaha, it was over secular marriage being somehow less. Reason doesn’t exist in this battle although you keep trying to assign reason. The main fight is over legal rights; so why insist on marriage? The constitution says to keep it all separated.

Your response is, unfortunately, what I expected. You appear to be in a cycle that exists for all who can’t break free of it. A bigot is always wrong — even when he’s right. He has too narrow a perspective. And, an inadequate respect for other views.

I have two blogs up today that are meant for you more than others. I hope you’ll accept them in the manner intended.