Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 177

Thread: Gay marriage bill passes in Minnesota

  1. #21
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer biggentleben's Avatar
    Posts
    936
    Like
    42
    Liked 68 Times in 48 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kydoty View Post
    Unfortunately that story was fake. It came from the Daily Currant, a satire news site.
    Yes, I realize. I just enjoyed the satire of her being so butt-hurt that she'd leave. Yet, who would want her?!
    Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

  2. #22
    Twins Moderator MVP USAFChief's Avatar
    Posts
    6,597
    Like
    3,668
    Liked 3,158 Times in 1,351 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mikecgrimes View Post
    2012 was a landslide in the state house and senate for Minnesota Democrats. Trust me the push to kill it didn't matter. This is the sort of issue that had unstoppable momentum over the years. The moment it could pass it would and thats what happened.

    As for Bachman the 6th district is a Republican district. If she had any flaws on the fiscal end you could defeat her in the primary process, but as nuts as she is on some issues theres just no way we can give her up. She's one of about 3 reps that I can count on to protect the tax payer and at this time in our history that goes a long ways.
    She's leaving, right? Isn't that what she said? She's giving YOU up.

    Can't say I blame her, what with the whole pillar of salt thing in play now.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio View Post
    How sad for the civil society, kids, and lexical definitions. The dictionary weeps with disgust. But since everything is living and breathing with language now, we can fittingly call this progress.
    Can't tell if this is serious, but consider the argument is well underway that people should have a right to choose their gender. One can even be male at school/work and female at home. Gender will be considered a fluid concept. Is it awful to support a standard by which we define male and female? The reason I ask is that union of male and female is as fundamental to marriage as the union of oxygen and hydrogen atoms is to water. Speaking of threesomes, no reason polygamy should not also be a civil right now.

  4. #24
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,585 Times in 823 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by mikecgrimes View Post
    As for Bachman the 6th district is a Republican district. If she had any flaws on the fiscal end you could defeat her in the primary process, but as nuts as she is on some issues theres just no way we can give her up. She's one of about 3 reps that I can count on to protect the tax payer and at this time in our history that goes a long ways.
    No, what Minnesota needs are a few politicians who haven't strapped themselves into the party of hypocrisy by yammering about personal responsibility while trying to remove every civic freedom with which they do not agree. It's that cognitive disconnect that bothers me most about the Tea Party. When you compare their various ideologies to one another, they don't make sense and are often in direct conflict with one another. Either you want personal responsibility and freedom or you don't; you can't pick and choose between the two because you'll look like a self-serving hypocrite to anyone with a brain.

    To an extent, the Democrats are just as guilty of this but at least their rhetoric surrounding it isn't so distasteful to anyone with a conscience.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer jay's Avatar
    Posts
    882
    Like
    13
    Liked 49 Times in 30 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    No, what Minnesota needs are a few politicians who haven't strapped themselves into the party of hypocrisy by yammering about personal responsibility while trying to remove every civic freedom with which they do not agree. It's that cognitive disconnect that bothers me most about the Tea Party. When you compare their various ideologies to one another, they don't make sense and are often in direct conflict with one another. Either you want personal responsibility and freedom or you don't; you can't pick and choose between the two because you'll look like a self-serving hypocrite to anyone with a brain.

    To an extent, the Democrats are just as guilty of this but at least their rhetoric surrounding it isn't so distasteful to anyone with a conscience.
    Brock, I think you've nailed the Republican party's biggest problem. However, I think that disconnect is more prevalent in the far-right religious conservatives than the Tea Party... which is actually an even more striking hypocrisy. The TP just gets all the media attention.

  6. #26
    Senior Member All-Star Ultima Ratio's Avatar
    Posts
    1,742
    Like
    58
    Liked 105 Times in 51 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornhead View Post
    Can't tell if this is serious, but consider the argument is well underway that people should have a right to choose their gender. One can even be male at school/work and female at home. Gender will be considered a fluid concept. Is it awful to support a standard by which we define male and female? The reason I ask is that union of male and female is as fundamental to marriage as the union of oxygen and hydrogen atoms is to water. Speaking of threesomes, no reason polygamy should not also be a civil right now.
    I'm serious and you are correct. Polygamy used to a reductio ad absurdum argument (the opposition wrongly tried to call it a slippery slope argument), but since attitudes of temporary politicians keep "evolving" (another bastardization of language), legal plural "marriage" [cringe]is on it's way too. And if proponents are serious (but probably just demagoguing) that the sufficient condition for marriage is love, then yes, plural marriage, marriage of brothers, sisters and so on will have to be recognized -- an if you're against that, then you don't have a conscience, but probably know the difference between inconsistency and hypocrisy. That last line is snark, to be clear.
    Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

  7. #27
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,585 Times in 823 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by jay View Post
    Brock, I think you've nailed the Republican party's biggest problem. However, I think that disconnect is more prevalent in the far-right religious conservatives than the Tea Party... which is actually an even more striking hypocrisy. The TP just gets all the media attention.
    Very true, it's a problem with the GOP in general... They've spent half a decade silencing and/or removing moderates who refuse to radicalize. All you have to do is look at how the party went through such lengths to marginalize Jon Huntsman during the last convention season to see how the party treats people who prefer common sense over party rhetoric.

    At some point, the party has to come back to the middle. How far they're going to continue heading toward CrazyTown is very much up for debate, though.

  8. #28
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,585 Times in 823 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio View Post
    I'm serious and you are correct. Polygamy used to a reductio ad absurdum argument (the opposition wrongly tried to call it a slippery slope argument), but since attitudes of temporary politicians keep "evolving" (another bastardization of language), legal plural "marriage" [cringe]is on it's way too. And if proponents are serious (but probably just demagoguing) that the sufficient condition for marriage is love, then yes, plural marriage, marriage of brothers, sisters and so on will have to be recognized -- an if you're against that, then you don't have a conscience, but probably know the difference between inconsistency and hypocrisy. That last line is snark, to be clear.
    There's a huge difference between polygamy and incestual relations, if only from a physical standpoint. One has medical reasoning to prevent legally... The other has a societal reason to prevent legally due to its past use to subjugate and oppress women, especially young girls (some of this can be applied to incestual marriage as well).

    For the record, I have no problems with polygamy on its face; I have no business telling others what to do with their lives if it does not affect me. My only problem comes with its past (and in some circles, current) societal implementation and abuse of the system.

  9. #29
    Senior Member All-Star Ultima Ratio's Avatar
    Posts
    1,742
    Like
    58
    Liked 105 Times in 51 Posts
    Brock, I didn't say brother marrying sister, but brother marrying brother and sister marrying sister. Does society have an interest in not allowing these "marriages" where procreation is impossible, but the love is sincere and earnest?
    Last edited by Ultima Ratio; 05-15-2013 at 12:31 PM.
    Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

  10. #30
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,585 Times in 823 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio View Post
    Brock, I didn't say brother marrying sister, but brother marrying brother and sister marrying sister. Does society have an interest in not allowing these "marriages" where procreation is impossible, but the love is sincere and earnest?
    I don't care, honestly. I also see it being such an insignificant problem that it isn't worth the time it takes to theorize over its morality or social impact.

    Approximately 8-10% of the population is gay. Gay siblings who wish to marry each other is, what, .00001%?

  11. #31
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,821
    Like
    176
    Liked 662 Times in 374 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio View Post
    Brock, I didn't say brother marrying sister, but brother marrying brother and sister marrying sister. Does society have an interest in not allowing these "marriages" where procreation is impossible, but the love is sincere and earnest?
    We should probably make sure our liquor laws account for raging cases of Benjamin Button disease or just throw it all out.

  12. #32
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio View Post
    Brock, I didn't say brother marrying sister, but brother marrying brother and sister marrying sister. Does society have an interest in not allowing these "marriages" where procreation is impossible, but the love is sincere and earnest?
    Like infertile heterosexuals? I don't get the whole "marriage is about procreation" argument at all.

    Marriage is about tax policy, adoption rights, medical decisions, all kinds of things that have nothing to do with either love or procreation. If society wants to say that only 2 people can be married to each other, and have these rights and responsibilities, isn't that what societal rules are for? For me, if 5 people want to live together and call themselves married, great. But society can say "you aren't married for the legal rights of 'married' people. Live together all you want, have kids all you want, but you won't have the same legal rights as others."

    Oh, and that would be a choice, "marrying" more than 1 person. Unlike sexual orientation, which is pretty clearly not any more a choice than skin color.
    Lighten up Francis....

  13. #33
    Twins News Team All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,954
    Like
    257
    Liked 206 Times in 115 Posts
    Pretty soon, we'll be able to marry our goats, cartoon characters, and figments of our imagination. And all such choices would affect me so very much, damn them!

  14. #34
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PseudoSABR View Post
    Pretty soon, we'll be able to marry our goats, cartoon characters, and figments of our imagination. And all such choices would affect me so very much, damn them!

    It's almost like your happiness does not effect my happiness---Stephen Colbert*

    *approximate quote...
    Lighten up Francis....

  15. #35
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,821
    Like
    176
    Liked 662 Times in 374 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post
    It's almost like your happiness does not effect my happiness---Stephen Colbert*

    *approximate quote...
    Pfft, your tune will change when our loving god nukes us for having naughty fun. That'll learn ya.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    There's a huge difference between polygamy and incestual relations, if only from a physical standpoint. One has medical reasoning to prevent legally... The other has a societal reason to prevent legally due to its past use to subjugate and oppress women, especially young girls (some of this can be applied to incestual marriage as well).

    For the record, I have no problems with polygamy on its face; I have no business telling others what to do with their lives if it does not affect me. My only problem comes with its past (and in some circles, current) societal implementation and abuse of the system.
    Having a child later in life comes with increased medical risks too, but I don’t hear the outcry against that. And the historical share of subjugation, abuse, and incest found in traditional marriage cannot be ignored. More compelling arguments than these are required if further expansion of marriage is to be prevented.

  17. #37
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    Pfft, your tune will change when our loving god nukes us for having naughty fun. That'll learn ya.
    It is true, if a loving god destroyed the earth in his wrath, my tune would definitely change.
    Lighten up Francis....

  18. #38
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    236
    Like
    3
    Liked 24 Times in 12 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    No, what Minnesota needs are a few politicians who haven't strapped themselves into the party of hypocrisy by yammering about personal responsibility while trying to remove every civic freedom with which they do not agree. It's that cognitive disconnect that bothers me most about the Tea Party.
    Thats Michele Bachmann not the tea party. The great thing about the tea party is our message attracts all kinds. If you think we should continue to increase spending beyond inflation fine but if you just happen to care about social issues which have nothing to do with the tea party worry about the individuals. Liberals don't get to define us.

  19. #39
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    236
    Like
    3
    Liked 24 Times in 12 Posts
    Jon Huntsman? His campaign was so weak nobody had any clue what he even stood for. Tim Pawlenty ran a much stronger campaign and he was out a year early.

  20. #40
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,105
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,585 Times in 823 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by mikecgrimes View Post
    Thats Michele Bachmann not the tea party. The great thing about the tea party is our message attracts all kinds. If you think we should continue to increase spending beyond inflation fine but if you just happen to care about social issues which have nothing to do with the tea party worry about the individuals. Liberals don't get to define us.
    It's not liberals. From the Tea Party website (pay particular attention to #15):

    15 Non-negotiable Core Beliefs

    1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.
    2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.
    3. A strong military is essential.
    4. Special interests must be eliminated.
    5. Gun ownership is sacred.
    6. Government must be downsized.
    7. The national budget must be balanced.
    8. Deficit spending must end.
    9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.
    10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
    11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.
    12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.
    13. Intrusive government must be stopped.
    14. English as our core language is required.
    15. Traditional family values are encouraged.


Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.