<p>I am niether democratic nor republican...but here's an observation for ya...
AND I FEEL LIKE OWNING THE PREZ. TODAY!!!! :) :) :)
Today on CNN.com
"At a commencement address, President Bush urged the new graduates of a Michigan Christian college to get involved in faith-based and community organizations as a way to promote freedom and equality for all."</p>
<p>One great way to promote freedom and equality for all would be to grant gays and lesbians civil rights as opposed to promoting constitutional amendments that deny them rights.</p>
<p>I LOVE THIS THREAD!! thanks, hyper</p>
<p>I think Bush was talking about REAL freedoms not marriage</p>
<p>so marriage is not a freedom anymore?</p>
<p>what's with liberals and gays.??</p>
<p>whats with conservatives and gays?</p>
<p>oh yeah -- Dick cheney's daughter is lesbian!</p>
<p>wats with liberals and dick cheneys daughter?</p>
<p>what's with Dick cheney daughter? haha </p>
<p>btw, its Taking Back SUNDAY</p>
<p>oh really???????????????????????????????????????????????</p>
<p>looks like you are obsessed with sucky bands.</p>
<p>haha ok....looks like you are making personal attacks as always.</p>
<p>Bush mentioned equality. Political manipulation and corruption here functions in the same way with respect to gays and lesbians as discrimination did to African Americans prior to civil rights movements. Essentially, constitutional amendments banning gay marriages undermine the civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution the same way the denial of African American vote prior to 1960 undermined the civil liberties.</p>
<p>From an objective point of view, discrimination against gays is wrong as well as unconstitutional.
It is so terrible that religious belief has to be brought into politics. </p>
<p>Some religions sanction male-female marriage only. But MY spiritual beliefs see no difference between male-female and male-male or female-female marriages. Even if I were part of a religion that happened to be against gay marriage, I would still not ban it because it IMPOSES the view of ONE RELIGION on everyone else through legislation.</p>
<p>I do believe in God, but I don't see how anyone has the authority to impose a uni-religious marital belief on everyone else.</p>
<p>Look at it this way:</p>
<p>Religion X believes in any marriage
Religion Y says only male-female marraiges
Religion Z says let BIOLOGY AND CROSS SPECIES unite and a man could wed a squirrel if he wanted to</p>
<p>I do not see how anyone (esp. a politician) has the authority to favor X Y or Z. The US should allow people of X Y AND Z to practice their beliefs without imposing the belief of RELIGION Y on members of X OR Z.</p>
<p>I dont need to make personal attacks on you. In this case, your posts speaks for itself. (btw, Saturdays and Sundays are different days if you didnt know that).</p>
<p>Nobody needs to make personal attacks but you are doing it anyway.... even when Hyper2400 is trying to debate you just keep on.....</p>
<p>"I do not see how anyone (esp. a politician) has the authority to favor X Y or Z. The US should allow people of X Y AND Z to practice their beliefs without imposing the belief of RELIGION Y on members of X OR Z."</p>
<p>By allowing others to do this would go against your own religion...dont you see?</p>
<p>I didn't realize marriage was a "right."</p>
<p>I never realized marriage wasnt based on "freedom."</p>
<p>"By allowing others to do this would go against your own religion...dont you see?"</p>
<p>Why would a politician want to impose laws based on religious beliefs?</p>
<p><quote>AND I FEEL LIKE OWNING THE PREZ. TODAY!!!!
Today on CNN.com
"At a commencement address, President Bush urged the new graduates of a Michigan Christian college to get involved in faith-based and community organizations as a way to promote freedom and equality for all."</quote></p>
<p>Huh? How are you owning anything? I could understand if he made some big slip-up, but what is intrincically wrong with the statement? Isn't it a positive/correct statement to encourage kids to enter into more community service to benefit society? Where is the "owning?" You disagree with the President on the issue...there is no objective right or wrong here, as there are many tricky factors that need to be accounted for to muddle through this issue. </p>
<p>I'm sorry, but the lead in was a bit befuddling...I carry no opinion either way on the issue at hand as both sides have done nothing to convince me that their cause is more noble than the other.</p>