President Barack Obama - Term Two Thread

[Rick]

What do y'all think of this?

I think he'll get a lot of votes from the black community. It's amazing that the white community has to take shit for the killing of a black kid that was killed by a Hispanic with a white/Jewish surname.

[Seven Wishes2]

Exploitation. Bullshit.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

If the Volt’s not in the federal witness protection program, it ought to be. Feburary and March sales were zero.

There will eventually come a point where gasoline vehicles cost more to produce and operate then electric. When that time comes, Chevy, Ford, and Chrysler had better being doing what Tesla is doing or Tesla will be the only American car in production.

Tesla does it right.

http://www.teslamotors.com/

Hey, that band make some nice looking cars.

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking. Scary.

I ve heard that people have been complaining that the entertainment systems in these cars are crap with most models only having a mp3 auxiliary jack and no FM radio. Telsla Mors apparently responded to this GREAT RADIO CONTROVERSY by saying tough, thats THE WAY IT IS

[Fact Finder]

25 Horrible Statistics About The U.S. Economy That Barack Obama Does Not Want You To Know .


Monday, 30 April 2012 07:17


The human capacity for self-delusion truly is remarkable. Most people out there end up believing exactly what they want to believe even when the truth is staring them right in the face. Take the U.S. economy for example. Barack Obama wants to believe that his policies have worked and that the U.S. economy is improving. So that is what he is telling the American people. The mainstream media wants to believe that Barack Obama is a good president and that his policies make sense and so they are reporting that we are experiencing an economic recovery. A very large segment of the U.S. population still fully supports Barack Obama and they want to believe that the economy is getting better so they are buying the propaganda that the mainstream media is feeding them. But is the U.S. economy really improving? The truth is that it is not.


The rate of employment among working age Americans is exactly where it was two years ago and household incomes have actually gone down while Obama has been president. Home ownership levels and home prices continue to decline. Meanwhile, food and gasoline continue to become even more expensive. The percentage of Americans that are dependent on the government is at an all-time record high and the U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars under Obama. We simply have not seen the type of economic recovery that we have seen after every other economic recession since World War II.

The horrible statistics about the U.S. economy that you are about to read are not talked about much by the mainstream media. They would rather be "positive" and "upbeat" about the direction that things are headed.

But lying to the American people is not going to help them. If you are speeding in a car toward a 500 foot cliff, you don't need someone to cheer you on. Instead, you need someone to slam on the brakes.

The cold, hard reality of the matter is that the U.S. economy is in far worse shape than it was four or five years ago.

We have never come close to recovering from the last recession and another one will be here soon.

The following are 25 horrible statistics about the U.S. economy that Barack Obama does not want you to know....

#1 The percentage of Americans that own homes is dropping rapidly. According to Gallup, the current level of homeownership in the United States is the lowest that Gallup has ever measured.

#2 Home prices in the U.S. continue to fall like a rock as well. They have declined for six months in a row and are now down a total of 35 percent from the peak of the housing bubble. The last time that home prices in the United States were this low was back in 2002.

#3 Last year, an astounding 53 percent of all U.S. college graduates under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed.

#4 Back in 2007, about 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer. Today, that number is above 30 percent.

#5 When Barack Obama first became president, the number of "long-term unemployed workers" in the United States was 2.6 million. Today, it is 5.3 million.

#6 The average duration of unemployment in the United States is about three times as long as it was back in the year 2000.

#7 Despite what the mainstream media would have us to believe, the truth is that the percentage of working age Americans that are employed is not increasing. Back in March 2010, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. In March 2011, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. In March 2012, 58.5 percent of all working age Americans were employed. So how can Barack Obama and the mainstream media claim that the employment situation in the United States is getting better? The employment rate is still essentially exactly where it was when the last recession supposedly ended.

#8 Back in 1950, more than 80 percent of all men in the United States had jobs. Today, less than 65 percent of all men in the United States have jobs.

#9 In 1962, 28 percent of all jobs in America were manufacturing jobs. In 2011, only 9 percent of all jobs in America were manufacturing jobs.

#10 In some areas of Detroit, Michigan you can buy a three bedroom home for just $500.

#11 According to one recent survey, approximately one-third of all Americans are not paying their bills on time at this point.

#12 Since Barack Obama entered the White House, the price of gasoline has risen by more than 100 percent.

#13 The student loan debt bubble continues to expand at a very frightening pace. Recently it was announced that total student loan debt in the United States has passed the one trillion dollar mark.

#14 Incredibly, one out of every four jobs in the United States pays $10 an hour or less at this point.

#15 Household incomes all over the United States continue to fall. After adjusting for inflation, median household income in America has declined by 7.8 percent since December 2007.

#16 Over the past several decades, government dependence has risen to unprecedented heights in the United States. The following is how I described the explosive growth of social welfare benefits in one recent article....


Back in 1960, social welfare benefits made up approximately 10 percent of all salaries and wages. In the year 2000, social welfare benefits made up approximately 21 percent of all salaries and wages. Today, social welfare benefits make up approximately 35 percent of all salaries and wages.

#17 In November 2008, 30.8 million Americans were on food stamps. Today, more than 46 million Americans are on food stamps.

#18 Right now, more than 25 percent of all American children are on food stamps.

#19 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, today 49 percent of all Americans live in a home that receives some form of benefits from the federal government.

#20 Over the next 75 years, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars. That comes to $328,404 for each and every household in the United States.

#21 During the first quarter of 2012, U.S. public debt rose by 359.1 billion dollars. U.S. GDP only rose by 142.4 billion dollars.

#22 At this point, the U.S. national debt is rising by more than 2 million dollars every single minute.

#23 The U.S. national debt has risen by more than 5 trillion dollars since the day that Barack Obama first took office. In a little more than 3 years Obama has added more to the national debt than the first 41 presidents combined.

#24 The Federal Reserve bought up approximately 61 percent of all government debt issued by the U.S. Treasury Department during 2011.

#25 The Federal Reserve continues to systematically destroy the value of the U.S. dollar. Since 1970, the U.S. dollar has lost more than 83 percent of its value.

But the horrible economic statistics only tell part of the story.

In communities all over America there is a feeling that something fundamental has changed. Businesses that have been around for generations are shutting their doors and there is a lot of fear in the air. The following is a brief excerpt from a recent interview with Richard Yamarone, the senior economist at Bloomberg Brief....


You have to listen to what the small businesses are telling you and right now they are telling you, ‘Hey, I’m the head of a 3rd or 4th generation, 75 or 100 year old business, and I’ve got to shut the doors’ or ‘I’ve got to let people go. And if I’m hiring anybody back, it’s only on a temporary basis.’

Sometimes they do this through a hiring firm so that they can sidestep paying unemployment benefit insurance. So that’s what’s really going on at the grassroots level of the economy. Very, very, grossly different from what you’re seeing in some of these numbers coming out in earnings releases.”

All over the country, millions of hard working Americans are desperately looking for work. They have been told that "the recession is over", but they are still finding it incredibly difficult to find anyone that will hire them. The following example is from a recent CNN article....


Joann Cotton, a 54-year-old Columbus, Mississippi, resident, was one of those faces of poverty we met on the tour. Unemployed for three years, Joann has gone from making "$60,000 a year to less than $15,000 overnight." Her husband is disabled and dependent on medicines the couple can no longer afford. They rely on food stamps, which, Joann says, "is depressing as hell."

Receiving government aid, however, has not been as depressing as her job search. Joann says she has applied for at least 300 jobs. Even though she can barely afford gas, she drives to the interviews only to learn that the employers want to hire younger candidates at low wages.

The experiences have taken a toll: "I've aged 10 years in the three years that I've been looking for a job," Joann told us. "I want to get a job so I can just relax and exhale ... but I can't. After a while you just give up."

Meanwhile, Barack Obama and his family continue to live the high life at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer.

Even many Democrats are starting to get very upset about this. The following is from a recent article by Paul Bedard....


Blue collar Democratic voters, stuck taking depressing “staycations” because they can’t afford gas and hotels, are resentful of the first family’s 17 lavish vacations around the world and don’t want their tax dollars paying for the Obamas’ holidays, according to a new analysis of swing voters.

It simply is not appropriate for the Obamas to be spending millions upon millions upon millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars on luxury vacations when so many Americans are deeply suffering.

But Barack Obama does not want you to know about any of this stuff.

He just wants you to buy his empty propaganda one more time so that he can continue to occupy the White House for another four years

[SF-Dano]

If the Volt’s not in the federal witness protection program, it ought to be. Feburary and March sales were zero.

There will eventually come a point where gasoline vehicles cost more to produce and operate then electric. When that time comes, Chevy, Ford, and Chrysler had better being doing what Tesla is doing or Tesla will be the only American car in production.

Tesla does it right.

http://www.teslamotors.com/

Hey, that band make some nice looking cars.

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking. Scary.

I ve heard that people have been complaining that the entertainment systems in these cars are crap with most models only having a mp3 auxiliary jack and no FM radio. Telsla Mors apparently responded to this GREAT RADIO CONTROVERSY by saying tough, thats THE WAY IT IS

nice!

[Monker]

If the Volt’s not in the federal witness protection program, it ought to be. Feburary and March sales were zero.

There will eventually come a point where gasoline vehicles cost more to produce and operate then electric. When that time comes, Chevy, Ford, and Chrysler had better being doing what Tesla is doing or Tesla will be the only American car in production.

Tesla does it right.

http://www.teslamotors.com/

Hey, that band make some nice looking cars.

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking. Scary.

I ve heard that people have been complaining that the entertainment systems in these cars are crap with most models only having a mp3 auxiliary jack and no FM radio. Telsla Mors apparently responded to this GREAT RADIO CONTROVERSY by saying tough, thats THE WAY IT IS

Haha. It's actually a good system:

200 watt, seven speaker stereo system with AM/FM/HD radio. Supports MP3, AAC, and MP4 music formats. System includes four speakers, two tweeters and one center channel speaker. Flash memory storage for up to 500 songs.

[Don]

I believe in Norway, they have began implementing a 100% tariff on any select non-hybrid/electric car sales. That is one way to push change. The funny thing is, Norway is the third largest Oil Exporter in the world behind Russia and Saudi Arabia.

[verslibre]

[SF-Dano]

Op-Ed piece on tax inequality that I just thought I would share. I don't know how accurate the numbers are, but I felt it was a good read.

Viewpoints: Face the truth about inequity of tax codes
By Bruce Maiman

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/05/01/445495 ... quity.html

[hoagiepete]

The corporation avoided the taxes, but taxes will eventually be paid. The employees and execs pay payroll taxes and the shareholders pay income tax on dividends and capital gains when shares are sold.

Corporate tax rates should be low as the money earned will eventually be taxed.

The article referenced state taxes. The states that decide not to have a tax and the states that decide to tax the hell out of you are the ones to blame as well. Not just the prudent businessman.

[Monker]

The corporation avoided the taxes, but taxes will eventually be paid. The employees and execs pay payroll taxes and the shareholders pay income tax on dividends and capital gains when shares are sold.

Corporate tax rates should be low as the money earned will eventually be taxed.

The article referenced state taxes. The states that decide not to have a tax and the states that decide to tax the hell out of you are the ones to blame as well. Not just the prudent businessman.

If 'corporations are people', then they should be taxed in exactly the same way.

[Memorex]

So today's job's numbers. There were only 115,000 new jobs added, which is basically nothing. That probably is about equal to population growth. But the number of people that stopped looking for work just last month is an insane 522,000.

In our country, that math drops the unemployment rate to 8.1%. That's a total joke. Don't look behind the curtain folks. Victory by attrition.

[RedWingFan]

So today's job's numbers. There were only 115,000 new jobs added, which is basically nothing. That probably is about equal to population growth. But the number of people that stopped looking for work just last month is an insane 522,000.

In our country, that math drops the unemployment rate to 8.1%. That's a total joke. Don't look behind the curtain folks. Victory by attrition.

This whole administration is chock full of liars. Only 185 more days!

[Memorex]

So today's job's numbers. There were only 115,000 new jobs added, which is basically nothing. That probably is about equal to population growth. But the number of people that stopped looking for work just last month is an insane 522,000.

In our country, that math drops the unemployment rate to 8.1%. That's a total joke. Don't look behind the curtain folks. Victory by attrition.

This whole administration is chock full of liars. Only 185 more days!

But Ropmney's not going to change the math now if he wins. Once one administration figures out a math gimmick, it's here to stay.

[Fact Finder]

[Memorex]

Now that - is funny!

[Memorex]

So the whole Obama supporting gay marriage. Here's my thought. He says he believes it's ok for same-sex couples to marry, but that it should be up to the states. Pretty weak, from the left. I think from the left's perspective, you have to say I'm for it and any state that votes against it is going against the constitution. From the right, you do say it's a state issue, but of course you also say it should not be allowed period. So I guess his statement straddles the line, obviously a calculated move. I think Obama has always believed it to be ok for same-sex couples to marry, but he wanted to be President, so he waited for polls to turn before he stated his belief. Now, he is back looking for votes. Already selling t-shirts, sending out fund raising letters, and has even stated that it was a position that was discussed with advisers and then discussed as to when the right time was. In that sense, the whole thing is pretty weak.

That said, maybe in history it takes things like this to turn a country from one way of thinking to another. I'd like to think we are past all that and people just stand up for what they believe in, but maybe it's more complicated than that. And so if his step allows for a step forward, then history will recognize it as such.

I for one usually feel things should be decided state by state. But in this case I tend to lean toward an overall federal recognition. Either it's constitutional or not. And once that is decided, it seems a state cannot change that fact. So in this case, I believe people should be able to marry whoever they want, so long as it's a who and not a what and not a violation of other laws (i.e. a man marrying a boy). I don't think there is anything in the constitution that would prevent this and I see nothing wrong with it.

For those that want to argue that somehow it is against God or whatever, at least do so in a respectful manner. The disgusting language used in this sense around here is pretty lame and childish.

And you say?

[Fact Finder]

So the whole Obama supporting gay marriage. Here's my thought. He says he believes it's ok for same-sex couples to marry, but that it should be up to the states. Pretty weak, from the left. I think from the left's perspective, you have to say I'm for it and any state that votes against it is going against the constitution. From the right, you do say it's a state issue, but of course you also say it should not be allowed period. So I guess his statement straddles the line, obviously a calculated move. I think Obama has always believed it to be ok for same-sex couples to marry, but he wanted to be President, so he waited for polls to turn before he stated his belief. Now, he is back looking for votes. Already selling t-shirts, sending out fund raising letters, and has even stated that it was a position that was discussed with advisers and then discussed as to when the right time was. In that sense, the whole thing is pretty weak.

That said, maybe in history it takes things like this to turn a country from one way of thinking to another. I'd like to think we are past all that and people just stand up for what they believe in, but maybe it's more complicated than that. And so if his step allows for a step forward, then history will recognize it as such.

I for one usually feel things should be decided state by state. But in this case I tend to lean toward an overall federal recognition. Either it's constitutional or not. And once that is decided, it seems a state cannot change that fact. So in this case, I believe people should be able to marry whoever they want, so long as it's a who and not a what and not a violation of other laws (i.e. a man marrying a boy). I don't think there is anything in the constitution that would prevent this and I see nothing wrong with it.

For those that want to argue that somehow it is against God or whatever, at least do so in a respectful manner. The disgusting language used in this sense around here is pretty lame and childish.

And you say?

Marriage is not recognized in the Constitution, never has been. It's always been an institution between an man and woman and has been recognized by and regulated thru mostly churches. The States only want you to get a marriage license to collect money, nothing else.

As for Obama selling t-shirts, I think this is highly uncalled for and if this hits the news over the weekened it will not help him one bit. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that this whole gay marriage thing has cost The Won millions of votes.

[Monker]

So the whole Obama supporting gay marriage. Here's my thought. He says he believes it's ok for same-sex couples to marry, but that it should be up to the states. Pretty weak, from the left. I think from the left's perspective, you have to say I'm for it and any state that votes against it is going against the constitution. From the right, you do say it's a state issue, but of course you also say it should not be allowed period. So I guess his statement straddles the line, obviously a calculated move. I think Obama has always believed it to be ok for same-sex couples to marry, but he wanted to be President, so he waited for polls to turn before he stated his belief. Now, he is back looking for votes. Already selling t-shirts, sending out fund raising letters, and has even stated that it was a position that was discussed with advisers and then discussed as to when the right time was. In that sense, the whole thing is pretty weak.

That said, maybe in history it takes things like this to turn a country from one way of thinking to another. I'd like to think we are past all that and people just stand up for what they believe in, but maybe it's more complicated than that. And so if his step allows for a step forward, then history will recognize it as such.

I for one usually feel things should be decided state by state. But in this case I tend to lean toward an overall federal recognition. Either it's constitutional or not. And once that is decided, it seems a state cannot change that fact. So in this case, I believe people should be able to marry whoever they want, so long as it's a who and not a what and not a violation of other laws (i.e. a man marrying a boy). I don't think there is anything in the constitution that would prevent this and I see nothing wrong with it.

For those that want to argue that somehow it is against God or whatever, at least do so in a respectful manner. The disgusting language used in this sense around here is pretty lame and childish.

And you say?

Marriage is not recognized in the Constitution, never has been. It's always been an institution between an man and woman and has been recognized by and regulated thru mostly churches. The States only want you to get a marriage license to collect money, nothing else.

As for Obama selling t-shirts, I think this is highly uncalled for and if this hits the news over the weekened it will not help him one bit. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that this whole gay marriage thing has cost The Won millions of votes.

This was posted to FB by a good friend of mine, who was relaying a post by a friend of hers. Both of them are attorney's, BTW, which I assume you are not. And, both of them are conservative Republicans who disagree with you :

Following North Carolina's decision concerning gay marriage, I feel compelled to post this message. I am a conservative and I am a Christian. I do not consider myself to be bigoted or homophobic. At one time, though I did not actively oppose gay marriage, I did support the right of voters to determine such issues within their own states.

I live in Iowa, one of the first states to "allow" same-sex marriages. A more accurate description of Iowa's "gay marriage law," though, would be that the Iowa Supreme Court, in a UNANIMOUS decision (an act which, incidentally, resulted in the removal of several noteworthy and respected justices) held that to deny ANY adult citizens of this state the right to marry, violated that person's rights to equal protection under Iowa's constitution (which is closely modeled after the US Constitution).

In the years following Varnum v. O'Brien, I have had the opportunity to reflect and observe the impact such decision had had on my home state. Armageddon has NOT begun, fire and brimstone have NOT (to the best of my knowledge) rained down upon my fellow citizens, and the Cubs have still NOT won the World Series.

What has happened is the full participation and introduction of a group of Iowans into a citizenry that had previously treated them as second class. As an attorney practicing in family law, I have had the pleasure of meeting with same-sex married couples to seeking to adopt, and the displeasure of meeting with same-sex married couples seeking divorce.

There has been NO fundamental change to the lives of the people of the State of Iowa since the Varnum decision other than a growing sense of pride as we see other states flounder, needlessly, with what should not even be an issue.

While the ever-increasingly shrill voices of those who oppose gay marriage in this state continue to lose support, I encourage the citizens of other states to take heart, examine their convictions and question exactly why they continue to oppose equality in marriage.

I know I did. And I found I was wrong. And I am sorry.

[Memorex]

So the whole Obama supporting gay marriage. Here's my thought. He says he believes it's ok for same-sex couples to marry, but that it should be up to the states. Pretty weak, from the left. I think from the left's perspective, you have to say I'm for it and any state that votes against it is going against the constitution. From the right, you do say it's a state issue, but of course you also say it should not be allowed period. So I guess his statement straddles the line, obviously a calculated move. I think Obama has always believed it to be ok for same-sex couples to marry, but he wanted to be President, so he waited for polls to turn before he stated his belief. Now, he is back looking for votes. Already selling t-shirts, sending out fund raising letters, and has even stated that it was a position that was discussed with advisers and then discussed as to when the right time was. In that sense, the whole thing is pretty weak.

That said, maybe in history it takes things like this to turn a country from one way of thinking to another. I'd like to think we are past all that and people just stand up for what they believe in, but maybe it's more complicated than that. And so if his step allows for a step forward, then history will recognize it as such.

I for one usually feel things should be decided state by state. But in this case I tend to lean toward an overall federal recognition. Either it's constitutional or not. And once that is decided, it seems a state cannot change that fact. So in this case, I believe people should be able to marry whoever they want, so long as it's a who and not a what and not a violation of other laws (i.e. a man marrying a boy). I don't think there is anything in the constitution that would prevent this and I see nothing wrong with it.

For those that want to argue that somehow it is against God or whatever, at least do so in a respectful manner. The disgusting language used in this sense around here is pretty lame and childish.

And you say?

Marriage is not recognized in the Constitution, never has been. It's always been an institution between an man and woman and has been recognized by and regulated thru mostly churches. The States only want you to get a marriage license to collect money, nothing else.

As for Obama selling t-shirts, I think this is highly uncalled for and if this hits the news over the weekened it will not help him one bit. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that this whole gay marriage thing has cost The Won millions of votes.

You are right. It is not in the constitution and anything not in the constitution is generally guided by the states. That's why part of me feels this is a state issue. However, if two same-sex people want to get married, it is likely unconstitutional to disallow it while allowing it for men/women. It would be like saying it's ok for a state to govern driving speeds, but have a different set of rules for Jewish people. A person does not have a constitutional right to drive at whatever speed they want, but the constitution does provide that all people be allowed to drive the same speed. Therefore, if marriage is legal in a state, then it should be legal for all those that want to marry.

That t-shirt you posted is being sold by Obama at this moment. He's quick.

[Memorex]

http://politics.kfyi.com/cc-common/mainheadlines3.html?feed=104707&article=10120431

I don't mind this being sold. I just find it beneath the president to be capitalizing on what he says was a long thoughtful evolution.

[Monker]

So the whole Obama supporting gay marriage. Here's my thought. He says he believes it's ok for same-sex couples to marry, but that it should be up to the states. Pretty weak, from the left. I think from the left's perspective, you have to say I'm for it and any state that votes against it is going against the constitution. From the right, you do say it's a state issue, but of course you also say it should not be allowed period. So I guess his statement straddles the line, obviously a calculated move. I think Obama has always believed it to be ok for same-sex couples to marry, but he wanted to be President, so he waited for polls to turn before he stated his belief. Now, he is back looking for votes. Already selling t-shirts, sending out fund raising letters, and has even stated that it was a position that was discussed with advisers and then discussed as to when the right time was. In that sense, the whole thing is pretty weak.

That said, maybe in history it takes things like this to turn a country from one way of thinking to another. I'd like to think we are past all that and people just stand up for what they believe in, but maybe it's more complicated than that. And so if his step allows for a step forward, then history will recognize it as such.

I for one usually feel things should be decided state by state. But in this case I tend to lean toward an overall federal recognition. Either it's constitutional or not. And once that is decided, it seems a state cannot change that fact. So in this case, I believe people should be able to marry whoever they want, so long as it's a who and not a what and not a violation of other laws (i.e. a man marrying a boy). I don't think there is anything in the constitution that would prevent this and I see nothing wrong with it.

For those that want to argue that somehow it is against God or whatever, at least do so in a respectful manner. The disgusting language used in this sense around here is pretty lame and childish.

And you say?

Marriage is not recognized in the Constitution, never has been. It's always been an institution between an man and woman and has been recognized by and regulated thru mostly churches. The States only want you to get a marriage license to collect money, nothing else.

As for Obama selling t-shirts, I think this is highly uncalled for and if this hits the news over the weekened it will not help him one bit. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that this whole gay marriage thing has cost The Won millions of votes.

You are right. It is not in the constitution and anything not in the constitution is generally guided by the states. That's why part of me feels this is a state issue. However, if two same-sex people want to get married, it is likely unconstitutional to disallow it while allowing it for men/women. It would be like saying it's ok for a state to govern driving speeds, but have a different set of rules for Jewish people. A person does not have a constitutional right to drive at whatever speed they want, but the constitution does provide that all people be allowed to drive the same speed. Therefore, if marriage is legal in a state, then it should be legal for all those that want to marry.

That t-shirt you posted is being sold by Obama at this moment. He's quick.

Marriage is not specifically mentioned but the 14th amendment in the "Bill of Rights" guarantees people equal protection and has generally been interpreted in the spirit of "All men are created equal". Marriage is a contract between two people. Any law that says certain types of people can not enter into that contract while others can is unconstitutional. It is also why none of your examples above would be written into law by any legislature, and why any court would say they are unconstitutional...at least that's they way it should be.

Also, marriage is a contract, as I said. A WEDDING is the celebration of that contract being entered into. They are completely different things...and you do not need a wedding, or a church, to enter into the contract of marriage. That is a simple fact. Too many people, it seems to me, confuse the two and/or believe they are the same thing.

[Memorex]

Why would anyone sign a contract to be nagged at for the rest of their lives? I kid. Or do I?

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Marriage is not recognized in the Constitution, never has been. It's always been an institution between an man and woman and has been recognized by and regulated thru mostly churches. The States only want you to get a marriage license to collect money, nothing else.

the state ( by that mean federal or state or local govts) ought ot be out the marriage business completely. They shouln't be issuing blood tests, issuing marriage certficiates, setting up tax incentives or penalties, or deciding who should or shouldnt get married. Individuals have the right to enter into living arrangements and agree personal contracts which whoever they want. Religions organizations ought to have the right to say who they want to offer a ceremony to and who they don't on their own private property. This controversy shouldn't even be a point of discussion!

[Fact Finder]

Looks like Newsweek doesn't want to be outdone by Time Mags breastfeeding cover......Thanks Newsweek, The Won just lost Ohio.

[donnaplease]

Also, marriage is a contract, as I said. A WEDDING is the celebration of that contract being entered into. They are completely different things...and you do not need a wedding, or a church, to enter into the contract of marriage. That is a simple fact. Too many people, it seems to me, confuse the two and/or believe they are the same thing.

I agree with this. So what happens when a gay couple wants to have a "wedding" in a church that doesn't recognize same-sex marriage? I can envision law suits and charges of bigotry against a church for practicing the tenets of their own faith. Furthermore, the marriage contract that you speak of is what most people would consider a 'civil union', but apparently that isn't good enough for the staunchest of same-sex marriage supporters.

[SF-Dano]

Also, marriage is a contract, as I said. A WEDDING is the celebration of that contract being entered into. They are completely different things...and you do not need a wedding, or a church, to enter into the contract of marriage. That is a simple fact. Too many people, it seems to me, confuse the two and/or believe they are the same thing.

I agree with this. So what happens when a gay couple wants to have a "wedding" in a church that doesn't recognize same-sex marriage? I can envision law suits and charges of bigotry against a church for practicing the tenets of their own faith. Furthermore, the marriage contract that you speak of is what most people would consider a 'civil union', but apparently that isn't good enough for the staunchest of same-sex marriage supporters.

This will definitely happen and on a large scale. Wait and see. I also believe we will see much violence and vandalism against these churches and their followers.

[slucero]

the gay marriage topic will all fall off the radar once Greece exits the Euro (and defaults on all her debt) and the contagion hits the US shores...

[conversationpc]

This will definitely happen and on a large scale. Wait and see. I also believe we will see much violence and vandalism against these churches and their followers.

That's already happened...This kind of thing was going on during and after the vote for Prop 8.

[BobbyinTN]

The majority should never be allowed to vote on the rights of the minority.

Read the 14th Amendment. It proves keeping gay from marrying is unconstitutional.

There should be a federal law allowing same sex marriage, just like the laws protecting women, blacks and other minorities.

Anyone using religion as an excuse to discriminate is lying to themselves and to God.

OBAMA 2012!!!!