| Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Cheney Differs With Same Sex Marriage Policy; Is this the end of Bush/Cheney? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 25 2004, 06:10 AM (357 Views) | |
| corky52 | Aug 25 2004, 06:02 PM Post #16 |
|
Member
|
Chris, Marriage is only a word, it's not worth the fractures it's causing. I'll take the same legal rights call xyzzy and accorded to all citizens regardless of sexual orientation and let the religious have the word marriage. Smallness over a group of sounds isn't in my nature, there are more important things to worry about. |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Aug 25 2004, 06:09 PM Post #17 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
You really think it's just the word for some? That old thread showed what can happen when you disagree with some people's personal values. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| corky52 | Aug 25 2004, 06:15 PM Post #18 |
|
Member
|
Chris, We'd sure find out who stood where after giving the word back to the religious wouldn't we? I think that the true nature of this discussion would would then make it's self evident. |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Aug 25 2004, 06:22 PM Post #19 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Social mores and norms of our nation will determine the matter. I guess I prefer that historic and system solution to any unconstrained liberal one. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| corky52 | Aug 25 2004, 06:32 PM Post #20 |
|
Member
|
Chris, Translation please! |
![]() |
|
| TexasShadow | Aug 25 2004, 06:36 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Jane
|
re marriage precedes religion.... well, chris, you are right to remind me of that. so maybe the answer is the churches need to change their wording and have a 'blessing' for marriages...or not..... because basically, that's what the churches do....bless the marriage. |
|
| |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Aug 25 2004, 06:57 PM Post #22 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Corky, social mores and norms are determined historically, systemically (mispelled as system above). They are as absolute as it gets, slow to change. They are determined in everything we do from simple interactions to the making of laws. This notion that marriage is somehow sacred and special only for some in no way represents a consensus, in fact trends show the population trending the opposite direction. The notion is thus founded on individual values, which everyone has a right to, unarguably, but for individuals to impose their values on others is the epitome of the unconstrained vision*. And to depend on centralized government to impose it the epitome of liberalism (modern sense). *"whether human nature is inherently imperfect and hasn't essentially changed throughout history (the "constrained vision"), or whether human nature can be improved through education, programs, and spending (the "unconstrained vision"...)" from a review of Sowell's A Conflict of Visions. Jane, that I believe is more accurate, the various churches bless marriage in religious ceremonies. No one is attacking or taking away from that private matter, that is up to the churches. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| corky52 | Aug 25 2004, 07:01 PM Post #23 |
|
Member
|
Chris, To many rules and far too many long noses! |
![]() |
|
| olstuf | Aug 25 2004, 08:15 PM Post #24 |
|
Bill
|
Back to the question. Is this difference of opinion of jurisdiction over the issue the break that will allow Bush to drop the anchor of Cheney or is Cheney taking this lifeboat early because of a leaky ship? You folks are as bad as Clinton defining a word. His was is, your's is marriage. Marriage is a word. Other cultures call the union something different. Now y'all think about it and I will check in the morning of the consensus. Old people need sleep. |
![]() |
|
| campingken | Aug 25 2004, 08:32 PM Post #25 |
|
Member
|
I am NOT a Cheney fan but he showed class when he answered the question about his daughter. Ken |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Aug 26 2004, 04:38 AM Post #26 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
olstuf, the Republicans need Cheney to retain any semblance of conservstism. In fact, while I listen to his words as sincere and heartfelt, this almost seems planned as a smokescreen for the announcement yesterday that the Republican Platform Endorses Ban on Gay Marriage
Note how just as "liberal" has been distorted by modern US politics, so has "conservative". |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| olstuf | Aug 26 2004, 06:28 AM Post #27 |
|
Bill
|
I would have liked it better if Cheney, in his statement on gay marriage, would have expanded his statement to say it is nobody's business whether his daughter or anyone else was gay. I'm pretty sure in my own mind that he probably feels this way but cannot say it because of his position in politics. It is not information that I need to know about someone. Despite the charge that there are religious objections to homosexual "marriages", I believe the biggest fear is the cost of benefits and the expansion of marital rights if it is recognized. Some states have included the cohabitation of same sex couples in some of these benefits but others, using the religious arguement, have not. Give the word marriage to the churches, call the union another name for legal purposes but to not recognize such a large faction of our population because of their sexuality is just plain wrong in my opinion. |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2








2:26 AM Jul 11