Ridiculous anti-gay marriage TV Ad Released

[Reason]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIYzlUGenuA

[Josh_LA]

Poe's law doesn't seem to apply much here.

it is unfair fearmongering to say the least.

I like the Young Turks!

[MyLibertyStuff]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIYzlUGenuA

How do people believe in this stuff...

[Josh_LA]

How do people believe in this stuff...

I think we (not you and I here at this forum, but we as a country, 80% of us)

have effectively proven the failure of democracy.

[robert4rp08]

*puke*

[Kraig]

How do people believe in this stuff...

What I am wondering is how much hate would you have to be willing to fund this stuff?

[MRoCkEd]

That was ridiculous. Marriage shouldn't even be a governmental issue, but as long as it is gays should be able to get marriage licenses too. Church's should never be required to marry anyone, though.

[silverhawks]

And I didn't think it could get any worse.

http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.5075687/apps/s/content.asp?ct=4828731

I think all the ignorance on the internet just found a home.

I think this actually proves that democracy as a system of government is an utter FAILURE. People should not be governed by a majority, they should be governed by self-determination and EQUALITY.

These people claim to come together in love? Why? To prevent other people from expressing theirs? What it comes down to is this - get government out of marriage - ALL marriage.

If two PEOPLE want to get married, don't feel that you need to ask permission of government or society; just do it. If you need to ask permission to do something, that is no crime, that does not harm anyone else and does not infringe on rights, are you actually a free person living in a free society?...

Hell, lets go one step further. If you have THREE consenting adults that say they want to be married to each other, GOOD FOR THEM, congratulations Mr and Mrs and Mrs Smith! It's NONE OF OUR BUSINESS, for crying out loud!

The sheer IGNORANCE of this thing...

I wish sometimes that I could pick up people and shake them until they get it in their heads that NOTHING is about gay, straight, black, white, religious, atheist...it's about EQUALITY.

Can you respect me having a marriage with a woman? Yes? That's great, because I can respect that you might want to get married to the person you love too. And I ... Read morecertainly don't have the right to stop you, just as you don't have the right to stop me. Do we need to get government involved in "approving" this - HELL NO.

In fact, tell me who this approach to social issues inconveniences apart from those who WANT the division there.

People should not have to ask permission from society or government to do anything if it commits no crime, harms no-one and infringes upon no right.

That is their right as free sovereign individuals.

Screw celebrating diversity (which I think actually encourages discrimination by putting people into social boxes and treating them differently), let's celebrate equality.

Let's celebrate reaching across social barriers - no matter what bigots and government regulation tells us to do.

Don't teach your kids that "gay is ok", teach them that everyone is equal, that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that above all else we should not be infringing upon each other's rights.

It's that simple, folks. And if someone tells you any different, I'll bet you good money it's because they want to maintain the status quo to advance their own agenda.

[ChaosControl]

The problem on this stupid issue is both sides are shoving their PoV down the other side's throat.

The solution of course is to completely eliminate marriage from anything regarding mating. This means no such thing as civil marriage/civil union/anything in the eyes of the law. Sure some combination of those who can consent to a contract can sign one to grant others the rights they have, such as hospital visitation and the like, but unless you specifically request such a contract, which has nothing to do with any coupling, then there is no "benefits".

You can still marry in your church or do hand fasting or whatever the heck you want, but no government involvement.

Why is this the solution? Simple. It neither condones homosexual behavior by legitimizing it with allowing said people to marry, nor does it condemn said behavior by preventing them from marrying. It is a win-win-win as it also reduces the interference from government in our lives.

Unfortunately both sides of the issues don't want a real solution, they only want their solution. I say to hell with both of them.

[misterx]

Marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman. Gays have the right to marry, they just don't want to because they're gay. We shouldn't have to change the definition of marriage just so they feel more comfortable with their lifestyle.

[Pennsylvania]

Are the costs of state marriage ceremonies generally paid only by those involved in the marriage, or by taxpayers at large?

[Kraig]

Marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman. Gays have the right to marry, they just don't want to because they're gay. We shouldn't have to change the definition of marriage just so they feel more comfortable with their lifestyle.

We? In this case the we = the government. It is not the government's job or right to say how me, you, or a gay man defines words, and what words he uses to label his relationship. They should have absolutely nothing to do with this, too bad the tax code is intertwined with marriage, that is where "we" went wrong.

[zach]

The problem on this stupid issue is both sides are shoving their PoV down the other side's throat.

Unfortunately both sides of the issues don't want a real solution, they only want their solution. I say to hell with both of them.

This.

I don't even want to begin how my personal life will significantly affect the millions of others in this country because I want to have a title that shouldn't be necessary in the first place. :rolleyes:

[jclay2]

The problem is that the government is at the center of marriage. We need to deregulate marriage so to speak and let the churches decide for themselves what marriage should and shouldn't be.

[Minarchy4Sale]

I didnt watch the video, but Im not for gay marriage either. The whole reason for the state to even be involved in the institution of marriage at all is to protect offspring.... By definition, this is a heterosexual function.

[ChaosControl]

Are the costs of state marriage ceremonies generally paid only by those involved in the marriage, or by taxpayers at large?

We all pay for it.
If say two people get married, one works and one doesn't.
They now have a new special joint tax bracket, which ultimately lowers their tax liability. We have to make up the difference.

[dgr]

The gay marriage issue for many has nothing to do with love and marriage.
Marriage (church) vs civil union(goverment) vs common law status
Legal Rights granted by goverment recgonization of the relationship
property, division and inheritance, surviors benefits, medical care, social security.
Having been granted most of these under civil and common statutes, the push for marriage is viewed as an assult on the church. You can't have it both ways, either the church and state are seperate, but the goverment still sets the rules on taxes
or the church and state are not seperate and the goverment sets all the rules
So who has the right to freedom , the state to say you can not have your belief
or the church to fight for centuries of doctrine and beliefs.
one man's freedom is another mans loss of freedom
and equating gay and transgender rights with the civil right movement is like comparing
red apples to green apples by one side and nuts and fruits to the other
let the states vote and majority rules

[JK/SEA]

Isn't 'letting' gays use the WORD marriage, a liberty issue, or is this just about 'letting' the church having 'special rights' to the WORD marriage?, and only being able to decide who gets to use the WORD?

I can think of another word that a 'certain' ethnic group gets to use, but everyone else who uses it will be considered racist. Words. Its only a word, and so is liberty.

I left our local Ron Paul group over this issue, due to a self appointed leader being adament, and vulgar over this. I cannot, and will not be part of a group that has leaders that use the Ron Paul movement to spout off about fighting over a word, and trying to rally Ron Paul grassroots people to follow this idea about denying liberties to people.

I stayed in this movement even AFTER i heard Lew Moore at our convention say he was supporting the Republican ticket from the bottom up.

I stayed in this movement even though leaders in our movement supported Dino NEOCON Rossi.

I stayed in this movement even though a leader in our group chastised grassroots over certain behavior's from newbies brought in by Ron Paul. He said he was embarresed by a 'certain' patriot at a Republican meeting, so therefore felt compelled to express his disdain at a large group of us in public and on our local forum over this.

I thought long and hard on leaving, and came to the conclusion that these 'leaders were using bait and switch techniques on issues.

I've taken the Jesse Ventura tactic of stepping out to see what happens, but i cannot be friendly to a dog that has fleas. I love the dog, but i don't want the fleas.

still here, and watching now.

[lucius]

//

[misterx]

Words have meanings. If we can't agree on the very meaning of what we say, then how can we agree on anything. Redefining words has been a vital tactic used by the reds to usher in their egalatarian utopia. In just a hundred years they've successfully turned black into white, up into down, moral into immoral, and good into bad.They can't convince people that X is better than Y, so they slowly change the definitions of both until they are completely reversed.

[misterx]

It's not about "letting" gays use the word marriage. They can use the word all day long, but they still can't be married when married means having a life partner of the opposite sex. A fat person can call himself skinny all day long, but he can't demand that government change the definition of skinny so that other people will call him as such.

[TonySutton]

misterx:

Regardless of your beliefs, churches are currently marrying same-sex couples all over this world without regard to their government's laws. This country is not a theocracy, we do not have a formal government sponsored religion. As a matter of fact this country was populated by immigrants who did not want the government meddling in their religion. They wanted freedom from government to worship their god, their way.

I agree with other posters here that the government needs to get out of the marriage business all together.

[kombayn]

Who cares? Honestly. Gays & lesbians will be able to marry in 30 years or less. It's just ignorance and bigoted to say they don't have the right. Our country is founded on the principal that everyone was created equal. This is just another form of discrimination that this country will have to get over. Just wait until we have a Gay or lesbian president, the evangelicals will hang themselves.

[TonySutton]

Just wait until we have a Gay or lesbian president, the evangelicals will hang themselves.

Some think we already did ;)

[Kludge]

Marriage is not secular. The government has no right to regulate it, nor the authority to force priests, pastors, or even judges to wed people against their will.

[Reason]

I agree that the govt should not have anything to do with marriage, however because it currently does I believe it has an obligation to provide it equally to both gay and straight couples.

[Reason]

Who cares? Honestly. Gays & lesbians will be able to marry in 30 years or less. It's just ignorance and bigoted to say they don't have the right. Our country is founded on the principal that everyone was created equal. This is just another form of discrimination that this country will have to get over. Just wait until we have a Gay or lesbian president,


the evangelicals will hang themselves.

:D

[Drknows]

What if they just recognize every straight marriage as a civil union? You cant patent the word marriage. Maybe some gay and lesbians believe in a god that allows them to get married?

They're treating the word marriage like its some type of establishment where gays and lesbians are not allowed. The people against gay marriage are on the wrong side of history.

[Kludge]

You cant patent the word marriage.

The government can. :)