Isnt it sad that to advance the gay agenda the voters must be silenced?

Question

Mass legeslator just voted to stop the issue of changing the constitution to define marriage by the voters.

Isn't it sad that in a democracy the voice of the people need to be repressed, and silenced?

Why are liberals so scared of the freedom to vote? Is force the only way to further your agenda?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PONP380&show_article=1

Yea, Tegarst. Like the attacks on the rich. Here is a minority that has few rights if any and where even the poorist has the right to vote to take away money and property that he's earned.

I'm sure you're for equal rights as long as you get more of them than the next group.

I'm sure by now you've reported me as a way to silence dissent.

dmspartan2000 - Don't forget ablut the straight people who were killed at the hands of gay people. Like Jeffery Dalhmer, Andrew Cunanan, Lee Malvo, John Wayne Gacy, and Aileen Wuornos to name just a few. Gays aren't innocent of murdering straights. Don't play the victim. It's not flattering.

Answer 1

Sadly enough yes. Homosexuals know that if they put it up for an up and down vote, most people would vote them down. That is why they are going through the courts.

Answer 2

The three branches of our government, executive, judicial and legislative are there to check each other and make sure one branch does not have more power than the other. The legislature is made up of representatives of the people. This vote had a huge majority and spoke for the people they represent. A populace vote is only one way for the people to be heard, the other way is through their legislators. The people have spoken.

In addition the judicial branch is there to ensure the laws are enforced and to protect the minorities from populace biggotry. This is their job!

Here's a piece from the link below. Qudos to the Mass state legislature, it's good to know people can think in goverment!

Today, during a joint session, Massachusetts lawmakers voted 151 to 45 to defeat a measure that would have placed a discriminatory, anti-marriage constitutional amendment before voters on the November 2008 ballot. The proposed amendment threatened to undo the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s historic 2003 decision making the state the first to recognize marriage equality for same-sex couples.

“This proposed constitutional amendment was a misguided attempt to put people's equal rights to a vote. We are grateful that the overwhelming majority of Massachusetts legislators rejected this divisive measure,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “Today’s vote is a reaffirmation of Massachusetts’ proud record of choosing equality over discrimination.

Answer 3

the three branches of our government, government, judicial and legislative are there to envision one yet another and make beneficial one branch would not have extra power than the different. The legislature is made up of representatives of the individuals. This vote had a extensive majority and spoke for the individuals they signify. A inhabitants vote is merely one way for the individuals to be heard, any incorrect way is by their legislators. the individuals have spoken. besides the judicial branch is there to ascertain the guidelines are enforced and to guard the minorities from inhabitants biggotry. it fairly is their activity! right it fairly is somewhat from the link below. Qudos to the Mass state legislature, that is nice to renowned human beings can think of in goverment! at present, for the period of a joint consultation, Massachusetts lawmakers voted 151 to 40 5 to defeat a level that would have located a discriminatory, anti-marriage constitutional substitute until now voters on the November 2008 poll. The proposed substitute threatened to undo the Massachusetts splendid Judicial courtroom’s historic 2003 decision making the state the 1st to renowned marriage equality for comparable-intercourse couples. “This proposed constitutional substitute replaced right into a misguided attempt to place human beings's equivalent rights to a vote. we are grateful that the overpowering majority of Massachusetts legislators rejected this divisive degree,” stated Human Rights marketing campaign President Joe Solmonese. “at present’s vote is a reaffirmation of Massachusetts’ proud checklist of choosing equality over discrimination.

Answer 4

I do agree with you that it is sad, but the issue of gay marriage is a rights issue, and should not be left up to the voters. I think they did the right thing in this case, god bless them. Why should you have a say in who I can legally marry?
How does it affect your life if I want to marry my same sex partner and enjoy the legal benefits of it?
I think we need a national constitutional amendment saying that no state can deny same sex marriage. Tell the conservatives that there are gays in the world that deserve equal rights, and deal with it!

Answer 5

I don't know what you're on about much. I just want the same rights as heterosexual people, nothing more. The right to marry is part of that.

I don't see why people such as yourself should be allowed to dictate what freedoms I have. It should be my decision to marry or not, not yours, so long it's consensual and legal, which LGBT relationships are.

I don't understand why it should matter to anyone who I fall in love with, or what my relationship status is.

You Americans are so nosy it seems, always looking to stick noses into other's business.

It should be my decision to make, not yours. I should be free to make it, not have it made for me, or be treated as a second class citizen.

Answer 6

Since there was a vote there was no silenced views. Hate laws are to stop hateful speech so if a priest preaches bigotry they will be breaking the law
The right are perverse and idiots as they want to impose thier hatred on everyone and tell others how to live.

Answer 7

Gay Agenda? Yeah, wanting equal rights such a horrible agenda..

Changing the constitution to say marriage is ONLY for a man and woman is like in 1950 we changed the constitution to say that marriage is only for white couples.

Yeah and it's pretty sad when South Africa has legalised gay marriage but most places in the U.S. haven't..

Answer 8

Once you've experienced what it's like to have your legal marital status yanked out from under your feet because of judges' and voters' whims, and once you've started planning a "re-wedding" because your first one may not be legal anymore, and once you've had to worry that you'll always be subject to "the peoples'" prejudices, and once sessions of state and federal legislatures are devoted to the idea that marriages like yours should be invalidated, then we'll talk!

Until then, chickens will cry over the closing of a KFC before I cry for your loss of the "right" to make important decisions for your fellow adult citizens.

Answer 9

I keep hearing the term "gay agenda". What does this mean? And what about the "force" that heterosexuals have used to kill others simply because they've disagreed with their lifestyle? Take a look at the link below.

Answer 10

What is this 'Gay Agenda' you fine, good people speak of?

I'm proud that my state has voted to extend benefits to same-sex partners. What I find sad is how tiny-minded people are so threatened by radical ideas like equality.

(after a few minutes)

Hmmm... I just did some checking.

"Three-quarters of legislators resoundingly rejected the anti-gay, anti-marriage equality ballot question with a vote of 151-45."

Sounds like a pretty hefty majority to me. So what is this being scared of the freedom to vote thing? It went to a vote and it was bounced out. It sounds like you simply don't like the outcome and are crying sour grapes.

Answer 11

I'm so proud of my home state for upholding the US Constitution, and giving all citizens the same marriage rights.

Funny, the last time I checked the Constitution was the law of the land AND the will of the people. That's why bigots who want to ban same-gender marriage would have to AMEND the Constitution to support their hatreds.

I bet a lot of people in the 1960s voted to keep integration and racism going, too. That doesn't make it right. That's why we have a legal system in place to uphold the Constitution.