Yes, I'm going there!

[flatwins]

Same thing I do when I analyze my life. Determine what is really important to me, work on those things, protect those things, and let the things that do not matter to me so much take a backseat.

If you're upset over someone else "gaining" rights that you had all along, maybe some self-reflection is in order.

To clarify I'm not singling out one particular issue. A good friend of mine is gay and her girlfriend is this cute little thing. I'm all "Heck yeah girl, drive that $h!+ through the headboard" so I don't take a big stance on that topic.
What I was referring to is issues in general. The country is pretty evenly divided down the center by those who don't want to change much and those who want to change everything come hell or high water. So pick a topic, even hypothetical. What if the government mandated that all engines larger that 4 cylinders would be phased out by 2015? What would you do; lay down and take it or fight it? What if we were told that an additional 20% of our income would be taxed and used to fund education in Mexico? These are just hypothetical examples but you never know what these clowns will come up with next.

There are certain social issues that not everyone is comfortable with. If they don't agree with these issues, it doesn't necessarily make them a hater. The left thinks that every single person should just accept every issue with open arms. Heck, when my mom went to college in the early 60s she didn't even know what a lesbian was and now the world is supposed to accept and support whatever is thrown at them. Not everyone is willing to do that. They're not bad people but they just weren't exposed to all this stuff on their youth and they tend to label it moral decline. Drugs weren't common in my parents' youth either but now the drug culture is in our faces every day. I personally tend to think of that as moral decline.

I've done my share of crazy and surprising things but deep down I'm a good old Oklahoma boy who lives by the term "Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out".

 

[donner]

To clarify I'm not singling out one particular issue. A good friend of mine is gay and her girlfriend is this cute little thing. I'm all "Heck yeah girl, drive that $h!+ through the headboard" so I don't take a big stance on that topic.
What I was referring to is issues in general. The country is pretty evenly divided down the center by those who don't want to change much and those who want to change everything come hell or high water. So pick a topic, even hypothetical. What if the government mandated that all engines larger that 4 cylinders would be phased out by 2015? What would you do; lay down and take it or fight it? What if we were told that an additional 20% of our income would be taxed and used to fund education in Mexico? These are just hypothetical examples but you never know what these clowns will come up with next.

There are certain social issues that not everyone is comfortable with. If they don't agree with these issues, it doesn't necessarily make them a hater. The left thinks that every single person should just accept every issue with open arms. Heck, when my mom went to college in the early 60s she didn't even know what a lesbian was and now the world is supposed to accept and support whatever is thrown at them. Not everyone is willing to do that. They're not bad people but they just weren't exposed to all this stuff on their youth and they tend to label it moral decline. Drugs weren't common in my parents' youth either but now the drug culture is in our faces every day. I personally tend to think of that as moral decline.

I've done my share of crazy and surprising things but deep down I'm a good old Oklahoma boy who lives by the term "Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out".

I think you make good points. I think there will always be those on the extremes of any issue who shout the loudest and resort to demonizing the other side. I think there is a vast majority of people in the middle who just want to live their own lives, and while they might not be comfortable with something, they are willing to look at the person they are interacting with and judge them as a person. That one on one, it doesn't matter if they are gay, straight, white, black or anything else. That what matters is what kind of person they are.

That is what I liked about the DOMA ruling. It puts people on a level field.

 

[Hobbes]

What if the government mandated that all engines larger that 4 cylinders would be phased out by 2015? What would you do; lay down and take it or fight it? What if we were told that an additional 20% of our income would be taxed and used to fund education in Mexico? These are just hypothetical examples but you never know what these clowns will come up with next.

Again, so many here don't get it.

The .gov WAS mandating. The .gov was dictating.
That's what DOMA was.

What SCOTUS said yesterday was 'federal gov, butt out'.
The right to define marriage is not enumerated as a right granted to the federal government, and is reserved to the states and to the people.

Wow, I see people post rants every day here about the federal gov intruding into peoples lives and when the court finally intervenes to limit the federal government they feel threatened.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

 

[flatwins]

Again, so many here don't get it.

The .gov WAS mandating. The .gov was dictating.
That's what DOMA was.

What SCOTUS said yesterday was 'federal gov, butt out'.
The right to define marriage is not enumerated as a right granted to the federal government, and is reserved to the states and to the people.

Wow, I see people post rants every day here about the federal gov intruding into peoples lives and when the court finally intervenes to limit the federal government they feel threatened.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

I agree with you, Hobbes. I like the fact that the Fed left it up to the states to decide. Kinda reminds me of how the country was laid out to begin with. I guess that under the new guidelines, if a gay couple lived in a state that didn't allow same-sex marriage they could get married in a state that did allow it and the Federal gov't would recognize the marriage and the "benefits" in contains. Is that the way you read it?

 

[SoonerDVM]

I agree with you, Hobbes. I like the fact that the Fed left it up to the states to decide. Kinda reminds me of how the country was laid out to begin with. I guess that under the new guidelines, if a gay couple lived in a state that didn't allow same-sex marriage they could get married in a state that did allow it and the Federal gov't would recognize the marriage and the "benefits" in contains. Is that the way you read it?

That's not the way I read it. If they get married, but live in a state that doesn't recognize their marriage, the fed doesn't either.

 

[SoonerDVM]

Again, so many here don't get it.

The .gov WAS mandating. The .gov was dictating.
That's what DOMA was.

What SCOTUS said yesterday was 'federal gov, butt out'.
The right to define marriage is not enumerated as a right granted to the federal government, and is reserved to the states and to the people.

Wow, I see people post rants every day here about the federal gov intruding into peoples lives and when the court finally intervenes to limit the federal government they feel threatened.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

Yep. We only want the fed to butt out of OUR lives. Get all up in those OTHER peoples' lives.

 

[Hobbes]

I agree with you, Hobbes. I like the fact that the Fed left it up to the states to decide. Kinda reminds me of how the country was laid out to begin with. I guess that under the new guidelines, if a gay couple lived in a state that didn't allow same-sex marriage they could get married in a state that did allow it and the Federal gov't would recognize the marriage and the "benefits" in contains. Is that the way you read it?

Not exactly.

If a couple reside in a state that says they are not married the feds go by the state laws.
If they reside in a state that says they are married the feds go by the state laws.

The federal government has been denied the power to define marriage, which is what DOMA was.
A true conservative should be overjoyed.

 

[flatwins]

That's not the way I read it. If they get married, but live in a state that doesn't recognize their marriage, the fed doesn't either.

Hmm, well to be honest I haven't researched it at all. I have no plans to marry for awhile, even with a member of the opposite sex.

 

[Hoov]

The whole gay marriage pro/con blah blah blah issue causes me to yawn. Maybe my give-a-damn is broken.

This^^

 

[Hoov]

And the number of sig lines out of this thread is epic!