Anyone need a wedding ring?

[TentamusDarkblade]

its depressing that the nation is so divided right now. The urban versus rural divide is only going to get worse before it gets better.

 

It's a no win situation.

 

And now that the religious right has gotten a stronger grasp on the nation, the seperation between religion and state is weakening.

[Dakoth]

its depressing that the nation is so divided right now. The urban versus rural divide is only going to get worse before it gets better.

 

Is this Bush's fault or was this something happening long before he got into office?

 

And now that the religious right has gotten a stronger grasp on the nation, the seperation between religion and state is weakening.

 

To use a line from someone else. Can you provide evidence for this?

[TentamusDarkblade]

its depressing that the nation is so divided right now. The urban versus rural divide is only going to get worse before it gets better.

 

Is this Bush's fault or was this something happening long before he got into office?

I don't think Bush is the cause, merely a symptom

And now that the religious right has gotten a stronger grasp on the nation, the seperation between religion and state is weakening.

 

To use a line from someone else. Can you provide evidence for this?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

there's this item and i've read other such articles that show the the religious right are trying to legislate religious idealogy and morality. Look at this last election. The republicans proudly claim that it was the evangilical vote that carried them.

 

The religious aspect of our nation put bush in office because he has championed many of their causes. Now that the republicans hold the House, the senate and the oval office it would be foolish to think that they wouldn't continue to play to their religious base voters wishes.

[sickboycp]

How would they fair if a man like John McCain ran?

 

The problem is I don't think a moderate Republican like McCain, or Arlen Specter (to give another example) would be able to win the Republican nomination anymore. Since Bush got in the first time, the Republican party has swung much more away from the moderate right that men like Specter or McCain belong to. A neocon is going to be the GOP's nominee four years from now, mark my words. In fact, Rick Santorum has already indicated he's planning on running in 2008

 

And here's a lovely quote from my state's favorite son, Senator Santorum

 

And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States

 

The Truth About 'Santorum'

 

EDIT: WARNING: Above site is not for those of a sensitive disposition.

[Dakoth]

First of all I hate to break it to all you atheists, but marrige was a religious cerimony a long long time before the governments took interest. I almost gaurantee if you can assure most christians that if this law is passed it will not be used as a weapon of the gay agenda to silence churches (The law said we can marry don't make me sue you for refusing to marry us. That sort of thing) I think there would be less oppostition. I feel more people are like me and could really care less as long as they don't force the church to marry them.

 

Secondly how is that any different than all the politically correct nonsense the extreme left tries to force us to use. I am not a garbageman I am a waste removal technitian. Please this is no different than when Clinton took office the far right thought it was the end of the world as they knew it. Guess what they and you are wrong.

[Weiser_Cain]

"Wait a minute what say does a cananadian have in any of this?"

 

The right to say my opinion! Contrary to what you anti Bush freaks think, freedom of speech still reigns (mostly!) in our two great countries!! That's exact;ly why youa re ALLOWED to call people stupid and call Bush Evil. Don't pretend you are any different from the Republicans when while they are calling you evil for "killing babies" and "being gay" (btw, I *do* support gay rights and the right to choose); youa re calling them evil for being "Christians". R00fles!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think they're evil because they're christian. They are crazy if the think this slim majority they enjoy mostly because most people think republicans are better at defense will allow them to create some sort of christian taliban, that makes them evil.

 

Oh wiser how deluded you are, you of anyone should know the shambles a democrat run state can be put into. Where does Illinois rank in dept for states again? How long has it been since a balanced budget has been passed? Why not enlighten the rest of these people to the cost of rent, property tax, and sales taxes in our great state. What is the cost of a single family home in the city of Chicago again? Yes wiser all that comes from those social programs the dems love so much. So take it from a crazy republican nutcase if you support those things you are the only idiot on this board.

 

I'm not from illinois, I'm from Chicago, and we're doing fine. The cost of a home here depends on a lot of things, if you don't care where you live it's pretty cheap. Democrat city.

 

Is this Bush's fault or was this something happening long before he got into office?

If McCain had been elected we would not be having this discussion. It's bushs fault because he want it and his core supporters want it and he's willing to split the country to get what he wants. I found it funny that he said he's willing to reach out to any democrat that will go along with him.

[Dakoth]

Really here is something interesting that was said by our states favorite son Richard M. Dailey (a staunch democrat). I did what I had to do migs field was a danger to the city of chicago. That was paraphrased by the way. He said that when questioned why he sent crews to migs to tear up the runways in the middle of the night when no one could get an injuntion to stop him. You see for ever nut on the right there is one on the left all politions will use what ever tactics or laws to their advantage. The problem is most people will look past their party doing it because if their side did it it must be right. How about we talk about the burgler who broke into the same house 2 nights in a row and when the home owner shot him the second night the home owner went to jail.

[sickboycp]

Really here is something interesting that was said by our states favorite son Richard M. Dailey (a staunch democrat).  I did what I had to do migs field was a danger to the city of chicago.  That was paraphrased by the way.  He said that when questioned why he sent crews to migs to tear up the runways in the middle of the night when no one could get an injuntion to stop him.  You see for ever nut on the right there is one on the left all politions will use what ever tactics or laws to their advantage.  The problem is most people will look past their party doing it because if their side did it it must be right.  How about we talk about the burgler who broke into the same house 2 nights in a row and when the home owner shot him the second night the home owner went to jail.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

But the difference is, Daley never had the opportunity to become president. The high-up Dems in the part knew that Daley was nuttier than a fruitcake. Santorum has that chance. In fact, a lot of the polls I've seen give him and Bill Frist the edge to succeed Bush come 2008.

[Weiser_Cain]

First of all I hate to break it to all you atheists, but marrige was a religious cerimony a long long time before the governments took interest.  I almost gaurantee if you can assure most christians that if this law is passed it will not be used as a weapon of the gay agenda to silence churches (The law said we can marry don't make me sue you for refusing to marry us.  That sort of thing)  I think there would be less oppostition.  I feel more people are like me and could really care less as long as they don't force the church to marry them.

 

Secondly how is that any different than all the politically correct nonsense the extreme left tries to force us to use.  I am not a garbageman I am a waste removal technitian.  Please this is no different than when Clinton took office the far right thought it was the end of the world as they knew it.  Guess what they and you are wrong.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stupid argument since it's not liberals that want to destroy the seperation of church and state. As it is now the church would never have to marry anyone they didn't want to. Who knows in the new world order of elected religious overlords we may need to seek aproval to marry, maybe even have to have blood test to ensure the purity of all involved.

Funny thing about being PC is that A, it was a choice and B no one tried to legislate it.

Now lets get down to it.

political correctness

adj. Abbr. PC

1. Of, relating to, or supporting broad social, political, and educational change, especially to redress historical injustices in matters such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.

2. Being or perceived as being overconcerned with such change, often to the exclusion of other matters.

 

Now, are you saying you're against redressing historical injustices?

[Weiser_Cain]

Really here is something interesting that was said by our states favorite son Richard M. Dailey (a staunch democrat).  I did what I had to do migs field was a danger to the city of chicago.  That was paraphrased by the way.  He said that when questioned why he sent crews to migs to tear up the runways in the middle of the night when no one could get an injuntion to stop him.  You see for ever nut on the right there is one on the left all politions will use what ever tactics or laws to their advantage.  The problem is most people will look past their party doing it because if their side did it it must be right.  How about we talk about the burgler who broke into the same house 2 nights in a row and when the home owner shot him the second night the home owner went to jail.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Underhanded. yes. Nuts. No. If that's the best you've got I'll raise you a trent lott and take you for every cent and the shirt off your back.

[Nartwak]

First of all I hate to break it to all you atheists, but marrige was a religious cerimony a long long time before the governments took interest.

With regards to the government, it's just a contract. Judges can oversee the process with equal legal authority.

 

I feel more people are like me and could really care less as long as they don't force the church to marry them.

When homosexual marriage was 'legalized' in SF the couples went to...

Besides which, some Churches have reinterpreted their dogmas to include the practice.

 

I'm not from illinois, I'm from Chicago,

Good job there.

 

If McCain had been elected we would not be having this discussion.

I wish I lived in that universe.

[Dakoth]

I'm not from illinois, I'm from Chicago, and we're doing fine. The cost of a home here depends on a lot of things, if you don't care where you live it's pretty cheap. Democrat city.

 

Interesting wiser you bring up a good point and that is the one about the failed social program called welfare. The projects of Chicago are some of the worst places to live, crime, drugs, gangs whole high rise floors burnt out people afraid to go out at night because they might get mugged or shot in a drive by. Also just because you are a Chicago elitest doesn't make you not from Illinois although I would like to claim that myself.

 

You are right it does depend on a lot of things I also notice you didn't adress the question directly. Also let me throw this out there why are people who can are leaving Chicago in droves for the Subburbs, and how much does a house in Naperville cost again on average 250-300,000 plus 8000 at least in property taxes a year.

 

If McCain had been elected we would not be having this discussion. It's bushs fault because he want it and his core supporters want it and he's willing to split the country to get what he wants. I found it funny that he said he's willing to reach out to any democrat that will go along with him.

 

Not really it was happening even before Clinton got in office. You see wiser people from small towns resent the fact that you city people leave the city for a better life in a small town, then when you get there and relise its not what you expected you try and change it into a mini Chicago. All you do is make it extremely hard for the people born and raised there to continue to live in their home town all for your version of progress.

 

I was born an hour from Chicago and can remeber when you could get a good house for under 100,000. Now because of urban flight you are lucky to find a good house in a decent neighbor hood for under 180,000. Oh yeah I am by no means poor either wiser I am a tradesman and my wife works for the post office so we do quite well, I just think its rediculas to pay Chicago money for small town life.

[Meshugger]

Why not?  I needed a break from Unreal and I was bored.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You're playing the good 'ole Unreal? Excellent taste you got there

 

On topic, Bush stands for almost everything i hate in this world. The only republican i wouldn't mind seeing in office would be either McCain or Schwarzenegger.

[Dakoth]

But the difference is, Daley never had the opportunity to become president. The high-up Dems in the part knew that Daley was nuttier than a fruitcake. Santorum has that chance. In fact, a lot of the polls I've seen give him and Bill Frist the edge to succeed Bush come 2008.

 

Ah so once again a dem choses inaction because it doesn't affect him. Way to go with people like you around I am sure all the things you fear will come true.

 

 

Stupid argument since it's not liberals that want to destroy the seperation of church and state.

 

Once again the miss use of the separation of church and state some thing else the left is good at. I have said it before and will again that was a provision of the constitution to protect the church from the state not the state from the church.

 

As it is now the church would never have to marry anyone they didn't want to. Who knows in the new world order of elected religious overlords we may need to seek aproval to marry, maybe even have to have blood test to ensure the purity of all involved

 

That changes the fact that marriage was a religious cerimony a long long time before governments got involved how?

 

Now, are you saying you're against redressing historical injustices?

 

Nope just think it needs to be said that there are secretaries, garbagemen, and that it doesn't take a village to raise a child. Does it truly matter if you are called a secretary or an administrative assisstant why not just do your job and give up on the self agrandisement.

 

Underhanded. yes. Nuts. No. If that's the best you've got I'll raise you a trent lott and take you for every cent and the shirt off your back.

 

Well how about I throw out gentlemen like Louis Farakan and Jesse Jackson 2 men that know reverse discrimination very well. Care to defend Farakans view that blackmen should kill all whitemen and form their own Black muslim nation?

 

With regards to the government, it's just a contract. Judges can oversee the process with equal legal authority.

 

Nartwak you missed the point churches have been conducting marriges for hundreds of years that is my point.

[sickboycp]

Ah so once again a dem choses inaction because it doesn't affect him. Way to go with people like you around I am sure all the things you fear will come true.

 

 

 

Ummm..inaction? I fail to see what that has to do with the point I made.

 

 

As for me personally, I volunteered for the campaign of Harris Wofford in 1994 when Santorum ran against him. Of course, Wofford lost and Santorum first entered the Senate. I volunteered for Democratic party during the 2000 and this latest elections, and ended up calling folks to remind them to vote. I've already signed on to aid Governor Ed Rendell who is considering to run against Santorum in 2006. Please don't not call me out on things you have no idea of.

I respect your opinions and even agree with you on some points, but this sort of attack alienates rather than backs up your points.

[Weiser_Cain]

Interesting wiser you bring up a good point and that is the one about the failed social program called welfare.  The projects of Chicago are some of the worst places to live, crime, drugs, gangs whole high rise floors burnt out people afraid to go out at night because they might get mugged or shot in a drive by.  Also just because you are a Chicago elitest doesn't make you not from Illinois although I would like to claim that myself.

The failure of 'the projects' reflects more on the overall failure of the government to help black people. They were thrown in these building and forgotten. The violence in the projects is only worse in that it's concentrated in one spot. Drive-bys happen on the street, most crime in the projects happens inside.

 

You are right it does depend on a lot of things I also notice you didn't adress the question directly.  Also let me throw this out there why are people who can are leaving Chicago in droves for the Subburbs, and how much does a house in Naperville cost again on average 250-300,000 plus 8000 at least in property taxes a year.

I haven't noticed any mass exodus. And I know a lot more people in chicago that live in the suburbs and work in chicago(or are from the suburbs or some small town) than the other way around. In fact everyone I know that lives in the middle of nowhere does so because it's cheaper or because of family ties.

 

 

Not really it was happening even before Clinton got in office.  You see wiser people from small towns resent the fact that you city people leave the city for a better life in a small town, then when you get there and relise its not what you expected you try and change it into a mini Chicago.  All you do is make it extremely hard for the people born and raised there to continue to live in their home town all for your version of progress.

So it's our fault we like working sewage systems? As far as I'm concerned once they move out there they become part of the community and there needs to be adjustment on both sides. Don't like this? Build your enclave and wait to get raided.

 

I'm not saying bush created the crazy evangalist movement, but his pandering to this movement is going to tear this country apart. That's not leadership.

 

I was born an hour from Chicago and can remeber when you could get a good house for under 100,000.  Now because of urban flight you are lucky to find a good house in a decent neighbor hood for under 180,000.  Oh yeah I am by no means poor either wiser I am a tradesman and my wife works for the post office so we do quite well, I just think its rediculas to pay Chicago money for small town life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[TentamusDarkblade]

wait a minute Dakoth....you're serisouly arguing that political correctness is as bad as legislated religion? Arguing that what boils down to basic politeness is as bad as forced religious values? You are out of your mind.

[Dakoth]

Ummm..inaction? I fail to see what that has to do with the point I made.

 

Sorry should have said way to tow the party line, don't speak bad of a dem to loudly that would be wrong.

 

The failure of 'the projects' reflects more on the overall failure of the government to help black people. They were thrown in these building and forgotten. The violence in the projects is only worse in that it's concentrated in one spot. Drive-bys happen on the street, most crime in the projects happens inside.

 

Who was in charge of that wiser it sure as hell wasn't republicans because Chicago is run by demecrats and has been for many years.

 

I haven't noticed any mass exodus. And I know a lot more people in chicago that live in the suburbs and work in chicago(or are from the suburbs or some small town) than the other way around. In fact everyone I know that lives in the middle of nowhere does so because it's cheaper or because of family ties.

 

Really why not ask the suburbs like Naperville, Plainfield, Joliet, Peotone, Manteno, Bourbonnais and Grantpark they were all small towns at one time and have exploded population wise because of people looking for a better school system than the Chicago public system. Incidently it to has benefitted from legislation by democrats hasn't it?

 

So it's our fault we like working sewage systems? As far as I'm concerned once they move out there they become part of the community and there needs to be adjustment on both sides. Don't like this? Build your enclave and wait to get raided.

 

Way to show your superiority again as if there were many places you can go in Illinois and not have a working sanitary system. That should show the rest of the people reading about your attitude that if you don't live in Chicago you don't count.

 

wait a minute....you're serisouly arguing that political correctness is as bad as legislated religion? You are out of your mind. Arguing that what boils down to basic politeness is as bad as forced religious values.

 

Please show me the forced religious values you follow, and no what I said was this over polite, no one is to blame, we can't hurt anyones feelings that is normally being shovled by the left is just as absurd as a religious person saying they don't like the state to marry gay couples.

[sickboycp]

But the difference is, Daley never had the opportunity to become president. The high-up Dems in the part knew that Daley was nuttier than a fruitcake.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry should have said way to tow the party line, don't speak bad of a dem that would be wrong.

 

LOL I said he was wrong and nuttier than a fruitcake. Like that W. VA Dem representative who said The Jews wanted us to go to war against Iraq. I'm not afraid to admit there are a lot of Dems who either a) blind to social realities or b) a douche.

 

I haven't heard you say something similiar about Robertson, Buchanan or the others in your party.

[Nartwak]

Nartwak you missed the point churches have been conducting marriges for hundreds of years that is my point.

Thousands of years actually. I get your point Dakoth, it's part of their social perogative. I'm saying that with regards to the working of our federal government, all marriage ceremonies performed by religious figures or those civil unions performed by Judges or those provided by common law are equal legally.

 

I'm just sayin', I don't think that homosexuals entering into civil unions, or those married by religions with provisions for them, undermine any religion's authority to declare a union sacred or profane as according to the tenants of its dogma.

[Weiser_Cain]

Once again the miss use of the separation of church and state some thing else the left is good at.  I have said it before and will again that was a provision of the constitution to protect the church from the state not the state from the church.

Bull****

 

 

That changes the fact that marriage was a religious cerimony a long long time before governments got involved how?

See we;'re here arguing about about how they want to dictate their version of marrige to the entire country, pay attention

 

Nope just think it needs to be said that there are secretaries, garbagemen, and that it doesn't take a village to raise a child.  Does it truly matter if you are called a secretary or an administrative assisstant why not just do your job and give up on the self agrandisement.

Hey smart guy, read that definition again it has nothing to do with custodians.

 

 

Well how about I throw out gentlemen like Louis Farakan and Jesse Jackson 2 men that know reverse discrimination very well.  Care to defend Farakans view that blackmen should kill all whitemen and form their own Black muslim nation?

You'll note that apart from being black those two men have nothing to do with each oither and have never held public office(I'm begining to wonder about you). What's more Jackson is a civil rights leader and farakan is an extremist. I haven't heard anything about killing(apart from him killing Malcom X, so I don't put it past him), But I do know he's been to a few KKK meetings promoting his idea of a new form of segregation where black people get their own state, sort of a super reservation.

Not exactly something high up on the liberal agenda.

Nartwak you missed the point churches have been conducting marriges for hundreds of years that is my point.

Some might say thousands of years but this isn't about what the churches do it about law.

[Dakoth]

LOL I said he was wrong and nuttier than a fruitcake. Like that W. VA Dem representative who said The Jews wanted us to go to war against Iraq. I'm not afraid to admit there are a lot of Dems who either a) blind to social realities or b) a douche.

 

I haven't heard you say something similiar about Robertson, Buchanan or the others in your party.

 

My problem with your statement was we knew what we were getting when Dailey was elected. The same can be said for the presidential election.

 

Then we do think some what a like as I feel the same about a lot of republicans. I don't bring them up 1 because no one else has and 2 even if you did I would not defend them because I don't think like them.

 

Limbaugh tends to be a blow hard as does Hannity at times.

[Commissar]

Once again the miss use of the separation of church and state some thing else the left is good at.  I have said it before and will again that was a provision of the constitution to protect the church from the state not the state from the church.

Bull****

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Whoa, I completely missed that statement from Dakoth. That's just crap. The provision is in the constitution to protect the state from the church, not the other way around. You forget that many, many Americans ended up in America during the founding days to escape religious persecution. The founding fathers did not want church interference; they weren't worried about state interference with the church.

 

Along those lines, I think it's about time that churches start getting taxed. They've completely blown the deal; they quite clearly supported candidates during this campaign, and that alone is enough to remove their tax-exempt status.

[Nartwak]

Once again the miss use of the separation of church and state some thing else the left is good at.  I have said it before and will again that was a provision of the constitution to protect the church from the state not the state from the church.

Bull****

It works both ways.

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; blah blah blah.*

[Dakoth]

I'm just sayin', I don't think that homosexuals entering into civil unions, or those married by religions with provisions for them, undermine any religion's authority to declare a union sacred or profane as according to the tenants of its dogma.

 

Then we agree I never said I was against gay marrige, I said a lot of fears would be aliviated if people could be assured the law would not become a weapon of the gay agenda. I am not saying it would but the people we are talking about are not always rational are they.

 

Bull****

 

Really so you are saying in a time when almost everyone had religion, and most of the settlers were running from a government that had a state sponsored church that was helping fleece the people of money it was the other way around? Interesting concept and even though wrong I know I will never change your mind.

 

See we;'re here arguing about about how they want to dictate their version of marrige to the entire country, pay attention

 

No we are not I stated my views if you didn't read them thats your problem. I simply am telling people why the religous right believes so adamantly about things when it comes to marrige.

 

Hey smart guy, read that definition again it has nothing to do with custodians.

 

Really thats funny neither did mine. What injustice is there in calling someone a stewardess instead of a flight attendant? Yet if you do people look at you as if you have just hurled a racial slur. That no matter how you want to debate also falls under political correctness and is a bit rediculas.

 

You'll note that apart from being black those two men have nothing to do with each oither and have never held public office(I'm begining to wonder about you). What's more Jackson is a civil rights leader and farakan is an extremist. I haven't heard anything about killing(apart from him killing Malcom X, so I don't put it past him), But I do know he's been to a few KKK meetings promoting his idea of a new form of segregation where black people get their own state, sort of a super reservation.

Not exactly something high up on the liberal agenda.

 

Yes but both hold strong political views and try to motivate their comunities to vote for democrats. You are 100% right Farakan is an extremest but for the most part so is the religous right while you have no problem with one you condem the other. Mr. Jackson lives for nothing more than to create conflict between african americans and whites that is why he went to Decatur to defend those fine young gentlemen that held that boxing match in the bleachers at that school.

 

Some might say thousands of years but this isn't about what the churches do it about law.

 

Gee thats funny what happened to the separation of church and state? If the state can preside over a church matter which is what marrige was for a long time why can not the church reside over affairs of state? It appears you think that that provision should only go 1 way right?

 

EDIT:

Whoa, I completely missed that statement from Dakoth. That's just crap. The provision is in the constitution to protect the state from the church, not the other way around. You forget that many, many Americans ended up in America during the founding days to escape religious persecution. The founding fathers did not want church interference; they weren't worried about state interference with the church.

 

Along those lines, I think it's about time that churches start getting taxed. They've completely blown the deal; they quite clearly supported candidates during this campaign, and that alone is enough to remove their tax-exempt status.

 

Comissar read carefully what you just typed because it explains what I said exactly. Why were they running from England again? Religous persicution by a king who when he got in a fight with the pope started a church that answered to him and outlawed all other religions thus making it the only church people could attend with out fear of legal repercussion. The reason that provision was written into the constitution was to keep that from happening in the new world.