Obama Ready To Sign Gay and Lesbian Marriage Act In Federal Constitutional Amendment

[Redbandito]

Your right. He is against Gay Marriage but for civil unions. That’s why a majority of Gays supported Hilary Clinton.

I don’t know that this is true. He’s had a little double speak on this. He opposed any constitutional amendments that would define marriage as between a man and woman (even in california). This is significant since california previously had both civil unions and domestic partnerships giving same sex couples all the same “rights” but not under the title of marriage. All of this was prior to their state supreme court arbitrarily ruling that their Constitution protected the right to “gay marriage” though nobody ever realized this for the decades prior to this ruling.

 

[Redbandito]

ill never understand whats so bad about separate but equal…

oh wait, its the same as segregation!
also, the first sentence of the op tells the story. “strong rumors”?
please, this is a “lets bash obama and gays!” thread…

Please don’t compare race (an entirely genetic issue) to the lifestyle of homosexuality which is a choice (regardless if there is a genetic component). And unlike “separate nut equal” someone who struggles with same sex attraction disorder has every right to marry anyone I can marry (that is any non-married adult of the opposite sex). The use of racist legislation previously directed toward blacks has no parallel to the desire to maintain the definition of marriage that every civilization in history has recognized.

 

[Redbandito]

if you dont want to be “forced” to perform abortions, then dont get in a field where you might have to.
most people research their career paths first.
also, in health care, your beliefs come dead last when it comes to what your patient wants…

This is not historically accurate. Ever heard of the conscience clause?

 

[mardukm]

what about them? and tho oath youre talking about is the hippocratic oath, and the reason abortion doesnt violate that, is because the medical profession doesnt find a fetus viable until the third trimester, where abortions are no longer allowed. now, as a public institution, all hospitals are required to offer the same basic services, such as abortion, emergency room care, the morning after pill, etc, if they are to receive government funding, as a PUBLIC institution. if they dont want to do that, thats perfectly acceptable, they can privatize, and not offer things they find morally objectionable, and you can forgo your government funding.
dont complain about not getting equal treatment when youre not offering equal services…

Abortion advocates are hypocrites. THEY’RE the ones that don’t want government to get involved in their “right” to murder babies, yet they want to force other individuals to do so.

Why should my tax dollars be used to kill babies? Answer me that. The abortion industry is the one that should be privatized, so people won’t have to be forced to kill babies just so they can retain their jobs.

You don’t have an answer because your position is pure hypocrisy.

 

[Redbandito]

what about them? and tho oath youre talking about is the hippocratic oath, and the reason abortion doesnt violate that, is because the medical profession doesnt find a fetus viable until the third trimester, where abortions are no longer allowed. now, as a public institution, all hospitals are required to offer the same basic services, such as abortion, emergency room care, the morning after pill, etc, if they are to receive government funding, as a PUBLIC institution. if they dont want to do that, thats perfectly acceptable, they can privatize, and not offer things they find morally objectionable, and you can forgo your government funding.
dont complain about not getting equal treatment when youre not offering equal services…

This email is fraught with error but I will only address the irony. You say the medical profession cannot perform third term abortions because the fetus is “viable” at this point yet the freedom of choice act would allow you to do precisely that. Quite a quandry for you since you’ve already admitted they’re “viable.”

 

[Elizabeth502]

Please don’t compare race (an entirely genetic issue) to the lifestyle of homosexuality which is a choice (regardless if there is a genetic component). And unlike “separate nut equal” someone who struggles with same sex attraction disorder has every right to marry anyone I can marry (that is any non-married adult of the opposite sex). The use of racist legislation previously directed toward blacks has no parallel to the desire to maintain the definition of marriage that every civilization in history has recognized.

Just as importantly, separate-but-equal, in the oft-quoted & cited legal case, referred to facilities and resources providing services, not to nomenclature regarding personal relationships. Additionally, education as a foundational right linked to opportunity cannot be compared one-for-one with interpersonal relationships.

Nevertheless, we are guaranteed the pursuit of happiness, as well as the ability to associate freely with people in noncriminal activities. (Essential freedoms but not unbounded license.) Inasmuch as the pursuit of happiness includes such associations, they cannot lawfully be restricted – such as trying to legislate bedroom activity between consenting adults. And inasmuch as economic opportunity and economic benefits are often enhanced by partnerships of all kinds (personal, such as marriage, as well as business), it would be constitutionally wrong to limit such opportunity. That’s why I am in favor of civil unions to be defined by the gov’t as different in category but equal in benefits and equal in **civil **privileges (not religious privileges, which are not the arena of the state to adjudicate).

Keep in mind that our country’s founding documents do not include parenthood or adoptive parenthood as a fundamental right. For many years – including to this day – straight infertile couples have applied to secular adoption agencies and been denied for all kinds of reasons which might subjectively be considered arbitrary. Yet to my knowledge there has been no civil suit successfully filed by any denied straight couple based on constitutional principles.

I’m just throwing this out there pre-emptively because there’s always someone who comes along stating the “rights” of gays to parent.

 

[Polaris]

Keep in mind that our country’s founding documents do not include parenthood or adoptive parenthood as a fundamental right. For many years – including to this day – straight infertile couples have applied to secular adoption agencies and been denied for all kinds of reasons which might subjectively be considered arbitrary. Yet to my knowledge there has been no civil suit successfully filed by any denied straight couple based on constitutional principles.

I’m just throwing this out there pre-emptively because there’s always someone who comes along stating the “rights” of gays to parent.

You do realize what this can mean, don’t you? Since it is not a right according to your own definition. The state would theoretically have the full power to regulate births for anyone. A one child policy in America could become a reality.

 

[Corki]

if you dont want to be “forced” to perform abortions, then dont get in a field where you might have to.
most people research their career paths first.
also, in health care, your beliefs come dead last when it comes to what your patient wants…

OT but…

I don’t think I would like to be in an environment where anyone who is pro-life is excluded from being a doctor, a nurse, a pharmacist or working in a hospital. It is a scary thought that every pregnant woman in America would be cared for by a pro-abortion Obstetrician.

 

[Corki]

what about them? and tho oath youre talking about is the hippocratic oath, and the reason abortion doesnt violate that, is because the medical profession doesnt find a fetus viable until the third trimester, where abortions are no longer allowed. now, as a public institution, all hospitals are required to offer the same basic services, such as abortion, emergency room care, the morning after pill, etc, if they are to receive government funding, as a PUBLIC institution. if they dont want to do that, thats perfectly acceptable, they can privatize, and not offer things they find morally objectionable, and you can forgo your government funding.
dont complain about not getting equal treatment when youre not offering equal services…

How many errors can you fit in one post?

First of all third trimester abortions are completely legal and barely regulated in the US.

Second Catholic hospitals are not Public institutions.

 

[Corki]

what about them? and tho oath youre talking about is the hippocratic oath, and the reason abortion doesnt violate that, is because the medical profession doesnt find a fetus viable until the third trimester, where abortions are no longer allowed. now, as a public institution, all hospitals are required to offer the same basic services, such as abortion, emergency room care, the morning after pill, etc, if they are to receive government funding, as a PUBLIC institution. if they dont want to do that, thats perfectly acceptable, they can privatize, and not offer things they find morally objectionable, and you can forgo your government funding.
dont complain about not getting equal treatment when youre not offering equal services…

How many errors can you fit in one post?

First of all third trimester abortions are completely legal and barely regulated in the US.

Second Catholic hospitals are not Public institutions. They ARE privatized but most accept medicare patients which has been interpreted to be the same as accepting federal funding.

Third, the part of the hypocratic oath, traditional version, that refers to abortions said “I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion.” The reason it doesn’t apply to US doctors is not, as you assert, that they don’t consider the unborn as patients, but because most medical schools dropped the hypocratic oath in the 70s.

Fourth, Abortion is an elective proceedure, not a basic hospital service. Hospitals can chose not to offer, for example, plastic surgery, and that’s fine but not offer to kill a baby – heresy.

 

[Teen4Christ]

I wish and i’d pray for the day, but this won’t happen…yet.

 

[rpp]

if you dont want to be “forced” to perform abortions, then dont get in a field where you might have to.
most people research their career paths first.
also, in health care, your beliefs come dead last when it comes to what your patient wants…

Wow, seriously arrogant. This post proves that the “Freedom of Choice Act” is a euphemism. Of course, this attitude does not take into account the doctors, nurses and health care workers who are already working in the field.

But then, the whole abortion topic and FOCA is off topic. This thread is about forcing Gay marriage on the states, not about FOCA.

 

[iamme]

If you think this thread is to bash Obama maybe you should set your thoughts in a different direction. Do you actually think Obama in his next four years of tenure as being President will be able to separate his Christian beliefs from his Political motives. You can not serve two masters. Whether it be country-wide abortion issues or the hotly debated Gay and Lesbian Marriage issues; I wouldn’t be so gullible to buy President-Elect Obama aspirations toward his Christian values on Moral Christian issues.
In Canada the late Prime Minister Pierre. E. Trudeau formalized the country-wide abortion bill…and Trudeau was Catholic.
Former Prime Minister Jean Chretien formalized the Gay and Lesbian Marriage Act and Adoption bill in Canada…and he was Catholic. Political leaders do what they do strictly for votes. Statistics reveal that most American Catholics voted for Obama when many priest’s and bishops tried persuading not to.
In Canada Catholic voters were to weak and complacent in their moral resolve when the Abortion and Gay & Lesbian Marriage Acts were passed and made law. They say history repeats itself. I would hate to see the same course of actions our Canadian defunct politicians made, happen in the United States.
You say it won’t happen ? Sad to say but I wouldn’t bet on it.

i would dance a jig if it happened.

 

[iamme]

Please don’t compare race (an entirely genetic issue) to the lifestyle of homosexuality which is a choice (regardless if there is a genetic component). And unlike “separate nut equal” someone who struggles with same sex attraction disorder has every right to marry anyone I can marry (that is any non-married adult of the opposite sex). The use of racist legislation previously directed toward blacks has no parallel to the desire to maintain the definition of marriage that every civilization in history has recognized.

how about sex? because they operated under many of the same conditions.
also, i didnt bring race into this, i brought people into it. im sorry if they offend you.

 

[iamme]

Abortion advocates are hypocrites. THEY’RE the ones that don’t want government to get involved in their “right” to murder babies, yet they want to force other individuals to do so.

Why should my tax dollars be used to kill babies? Answer me that. The abortion industry is the one that should be privatized, so people won’t have to be forced to kill babies just so they can retain their jobs.

You don’t have an answer because your position is pure hypocrisy.

stop paying the amount of taxes that youve calculated to be used towards abortions. really, do it, then when the irs asks why youre not paying that amount, tell them why, then stand by your righteous convictions and see what happens.

my position could very well be hypocritical (it isnt) but its better than being hateful.

 

[iamme]

Fourth, Abortion is an elective proceedure, not a basic hospital service. Hospitals can chose not to offer, for example, plastic surgery, and that’s fine but not offer to kill a baby – heresy.

most plastic surgery is done inside the clinics themselves in which the doctors practice, much like a clinic made for abortions, what are they called, abortion clinics? oh, and the hospital service, that isnt elective, is the morning after pill, which is what all your hubbub is about bub…

 

[Elizabeth502]

You do realize what this can mean, don’t you? Since it is not a right according to your own definition. The state would theoretically have the full power to regulate births for anyone. A one child policy in America could become a reality.

[See **bolded]: No, that would be according to the founding documents. And since it’s never happened from the instituting of those documents until the present day that Americans have found natural parenting to be in jeopardy (such as, restricted), it is unlikely to happen in the future. We have neither the cultural perspectives nor the practical considerations driving China’s policy.

 

[Redbandito]

how about sex? because they operated under many of the same conditions.
also, i didnt bring race into this, i brought people into it. im sorry if they offend you.

You really don’t have a clue what you’re talking. In a bit over your head it appears. But to be dishonest is a different story. You absolutely did bring up race. You compared separate but equal an segregation to the marriage/civil union situation we currently face. So don’t try to flip it simply because you aren’t able to counter the argument.

As for being offended, what on earth are you talking about. The only offensive thing on this thread is the irrationality of your arguments. I never stated I was offended. Let’s knock attributing feelings or motives to each other and focus like a laser beam on the merits of the argument itself.

Finally, sex would clearly fall under the same costructs as race since it is entirely determined by genetics. Nor is being man/woman a lifestyle choice. Rather it is just a genetic fact.

 

[Redbandito]

most plastic surgery is done inside the clinics themselves in which the doctors practice, much like a clinic made for abortions, what are they called, abortion clinics? oh, and the hospital service, that isnt elective, is the morning after pill, which is what all your hubbub is about bub…

Yes it is. Sorry, you’re just wrong.

 

[Redbandito]

stop paying the amount of taxes that youve calculated to be used towards abortions. really, do it, then when the irs asks why youre not paying that amount, tell them why, then stand by your righteous convictions and see what happens.

my position could very well be hypocritical (it isnt) but its better than being hateful.

If defending the lives of millions of innocent babies is hateful, the world is upside down and no longer has meaning. Therefore please hereby consider me hateful (/sarcasm).