Seriously though, as if chess weren’t serious enough, do please elaborate on this promotional textbook theory. What textbooks are we dealing with here? How will one go about promoting homosexual marriage therein?

As to the whole “think of the children” argument, I always wonder why some people would rather force their children into an unhappy relationship or no relationship at all, rather than let their children be in a healthy one. I would think religious folks who really care about their children would side more with this quote from a Lawrence Block book: “Happiness is when your son marries a boy of his own faith.”

1) “Have yourself a Merry Little Christmas, make the Yuletide gay.” Mixes Bing Crosby, Christianity, Paganism, and happy homosexuality all together in one compact lyric. FAILED IN THE MANGER
2) “Do you take this man to be your husband?” Woman: “I do.” Man: “I can’t, the state won’t let me.” FAILED AT THE ALTAR (not to mention the tax return)
3) That’s so laughable there’s no place to start, except that the failure of the family unit has everything to do with government tax policy and intervention in the workplace that causes stressed families to have to work two or more jobs at depressed wages to meet their tax burden and still make ends meet, killing the family unit from lack of time to actually be a family. My parents’ family unit failed not from homosexuality (there was none) but from dysfunctionality–and that problem knows no sexual orientation. FAILED SQUARED
4.) Real conservatives let people be responsible for their actions, including the ability to make them in the first place. Secto-authoritarians are the fools trying to regulate and legislate behavior in the name of subjective morality. FAILED BY THE CHURCH BELL
5.) REAL men are secure enough in themselves that they don’t give a flying f*** about sexual orientation. FAIL 180.

Got any more fish in that barrel?

Im no medical professional, but im quite sure you’re right about the genitalia determining your gender.

2) Except they don’t have the right to marry in most states. Hmmm. And you call gay people “sick?” That’s interesting. And how exactly is giving gay people the right to marry imposing “their culture” upon you? As a clever protest sign said, “Give me the right to marry my boyfriend or I’ll marry your daughter!”

3) Even if homosexuality is an emotional thing, why does that make it right to discriminate against these people? We don’t stop schizophrenics or people with bipolar disorder from marrying each other, do we? And if it is a psychological disorder, as you claim, then what do you propose we do about it – put every gay person into psychoanalysis? That’s just unrealistic.

Plus, how the hell would this be “attacking our children?” If their real agenda (as if gay people all did things en masse with all of the same goals!) is to change our text books (which is one of the crazier things I’ve ever heard) you don’t think they could do it without getting married?

4)OK, you still haven’t explained how two gay people getting married affects anyone but those two people (and maybe the local economy where they got married and their guests and friends, but that’s all positive).

5) I’m pretty sure being a man is determined by your genitalia. I might be wrong about that, but I’m almost 100% sure.

http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/troy-king-reported-to-be-dating-troy-university-homecoming-king/

1) There is no such thing as ” gay.” ” Gay ” is a marketing term for homosexuals.
2) Homosexuals have all of the rights that heterosexuals do. They are NOT being discriminated against. When the homosexual movement attempts to impose its culture and societal organization on the rest of the nation the normal ( i.e; not sick ) citizens have a right and duty to defend not only themselves but all future generations.
3) Homosexuality is a emotional pathology that results from the collapse of the family unit. Homosexual marriage is not a end in itself but is intended to open the door to a mass attack upon the children of our nation as a result of the lawsuits which will demand that all textbooks be revised to promote homosexuality when homosexual marriage is legalized.
4) Real conservatives protect the family. Real conservatives protect children. Real conservatives protect the future generations of our nation. Hence no REAL conservative would ever in any possible way do anything but oppose homosexual marriage.
5) On a deeper social/cultural level REAL men will never promote, endorse, support, or encourage homosexuality in any way. Only feminized males ( inferior men known as ” femen ” ) will promote such cultural pathology.

Don Grundmann Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

As to why right-wingers might view this as being a threat to “traditional” marriage, one need only consider what the politics are of persons who have been arrested for pandering in the public potties. If same sex marriages are no longer prohibited by law, many right-wing activists, will put down their politiking, and start actively seeking their own personal Man Dates.

The use of “right-wing” above was intentional, as no REAL Conservative would be opposed to same sex marriages. In the words of Mr. Conservative himself:

“The big thing is to make this country, along with every other country in the world with a few exceptions, quit discriminating against people just because they’re gay. You don’t have to agree with it, but they have a constitutional right to be gay. And that’s what brings me into it.” – Senator Barry Morris Goldwater, as quoted in: Lloyd Grove, “Barry Goldwater’s Left Turn “, Washington Post, July 28, 1994

Catherine is the LGBT advisor for the LNC, not the LP as a whole. This means that she’s a volunteer (to my knowledge) who comes into the office once a week to help work on LGBT issues. It doesn’t mean anyone ‘ordained’ her as *the* point-issue person; it means that since she is willing to come in the office so often, she has the title in relation to the LNC (the LNC being the office). And yes, she came in about a month ago.

step 1: eliminate the marriage license

step 2: take away all other state involvement in marriage/divorces

hmmm that’s all I can think of. Now THAT’S equality!

And how is the LP “finally’ acting libertarian? I never saw the LP take an anti-gay marriage stance. Are you dense?

I have this question for him: since he is silent on the effect of divorce on marriage, does he therefore promote breaking up families?

I just love the people who want to make government just small enough to fit in our bedrooms.