First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Michigan Senate Proposes Bill to make homosexual acts a felony
zaldar 
34804 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / Charlotte NC
Offline
Posted 2/15/16
Even if homosexual marriage is overturned there is a supreme court case called Lawrence V. Texas that would make this unenforceable. Texas tried this and the law was shut down. So yes as said before nothing to see here. And even if we replace Scalia with another moral (as opposed to economic which is different hell I am an economic conservative) conservative that will only leave the court the way it was when Lawrence v. Texas was decided so nothing will change. Political grandstanding that will lead to nothing.
Posted 2/16/16 , edited 2/16/16
I live in Michigan & this is a totally misguided & uninformed statement, bordering on propaganda. The bill refers to animals. Basically, you can't put peanut butter on you knob & make your dog lick it off. This does not affect humans in any way, unless you have sex with animals. Then you should be punished severely. Think about it. If you're performing oral sex acts on your partner in your bedroom or kitchen or where ever, what, do you think cops will break down your door, throw you on the ground & slap handcuffs on you? Also, this has NOTHING to do with homosexuals, or any humans. It's to protect animals from sexual abuse.
70 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F
Offline
Posted 2/16/16

dougeprofile wrote:

Much better for radical leftists in the government working in conjunction with homosexual advocacy groups to crush anyone who declines to participate in a same sex wedding.

This may just be a poorly written law; I'm pretty sure that sodomy law was either repealed or NEVER enforced. Those kinds of laws were always a bad idea.


There are radical leftists in the government? Since when?
2047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/16/16

ElectricRuka wrote:


dougeprofile wrote:

Much better for radical leftists in the government working in conjunction with homosexual advocacy groups to crush anyone who declines to participate in a same sex wedding.

This may just be a poorly written law; I'm pretty sure that sodomy law was either repealed or NEVER enforced. Those kinds of laws were always a bad idea.


There are radical leftists in the government? Since when?


Obama for one
70 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F
Offline
Posted 2/16/16

biscuitnote wrote:


ElectricRuka wrote:


dougeprofile wrote:

Much better for radical leftists in the government working in conjunction with homosexual advocacy groups to crush anyone who declines to participate in a same sex wedding.

This may just be a poorly written law; I'm pretty sure that sodomy law was either repealed or NEVER enforced. Those kinds of laws were always a bad idea.


There are radical leftists in the government? Since when?


Obama for one


Obama isn't a radical leftist, he's not even on the left side of the spectrum. The Democrat Party, despite supporting social liberal policies, would fall on the center-right. Even if he could be described as "leftist," he's certainly not an anarchist, communist, or socialist (i.e radical leftists). Despite what the GOP claims, he's not calling for the abolition of private ownership of the means of production.
2047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/16/16

ElectricRuka wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:


ElectricRuka wrote:


dougeprofile wrote:

Much better for radical leftists in the government working in conjunction with homosexual advocacy groups to crush anyone who declines to participate in a same sex wedding.

This may just be a poorly written law; I'm pretty sure that sodomy law was either repealed or NEVER enforced. Those kinds of laws were always a bad idea.


There are radical leftists in the government? Since when?


Obama for one


Obama isn't a radical leftist, he's not even on the left side of the spectrum. The Democrat Party, despite supporting social liberal policies, would fall on the center-right. Even if he could be described as "leftist," he's certainly not an anarchist, communist, or socialist (i.e radical leftists). Despite what the GOP claims, he's not calling for the abolition of private ownership of the means of production.


Lololollolo center right good one I laughed so hard I spit my coffee out
70 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F
Offline
Posted 2/16/16

biscuitnote wrote:


ElectricRuka wrote:


biscuitnote wrote:


ElectricRuka wrote:


dougeprofile wrote:

Much better for radical leftists in the government working in conjunction with homosexual advocacy groups to crush anyone who declines to participate in a same sex wedding.

This may just be a poorly written law; I'm pretty sure that sodomy law was either repealed or NEVER enforced. Those kinds of laws were always a bad idea.


There are radical leftists in the government? Since when?


Obama for one


Obama isn't a radical leftist, he's not even on the left side of the spectrum. The Democrat Party, despite supporting social liberal policies, would fall on the center-right. Even if he could be described as "leftist," he's certainly not an anarchist, communist, or socialist (i.e radical leftists). Despite what the GOP claims, he's not calling for the abolition of private ownership of the means of production.


Lololollolo center right good one I laughed so hard I spit my coffee out


Well that's nice and all, but it doesn't really do anything to refute my post.

If Obama and the Democrats are radical leftists, then Europe must be a Stalinist hell because the social democrats are more to the left than they are.

Also, no one is being forced into participating in same sex weddings. They're required by law to recognize them (the same way they would a heterosexual one). One doesn't get to opt out of laws they don't like, as Kim Davis discovered.
22557 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 2/16/16 , edited 2/16/16
Glad to see their state government has its priorities. Water is in undrinkable in some parts of the state, sky high unemployment, but yeah, we can't have butt sex in our state!
23206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Long Island
Offline
Posted 2/16/16 , edited 2/16/16
Because that's definitely Michigan's most pressing issue at the moment
585 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / F
Offline
Posted 2/16/16 , edited 2/16/16
This is why bigots shouldn't be allowed to get into politics much less run the government.
41687 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/16/16 , edited 2/16/16
I thought MI was more liberal? My aunts are from there and both fairly liberal, and the college town where they live seems to be as well?

Anyway, what is this, the medieval era? This ain't gonna fly. It goes against the recent gay marriage legalization as well as the more tolerant mindset of society itself.
13508 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Second star on th...
Offline
Posted 2/16/16
Everybody needs to stop getting their panties in a f-ing twist. It says crimes against nature which if you thought about it for a second you would realize that that could mean a hell of a lot of different things. Including having sex with an animal or a corpse, those could both be considered crimes against nature. Seeing as the supreme court already ruled that acts between consenting adults in private are protected by the Constitution and could not be criminalized under "crimes against nature" laws it would not effect homosexuals at all. So put your GD pitchforks and torches away not everything is about homosexuals
218 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/16/16
I think the OP tried to clickbait us.
Posted 2/16/16


Wait, wait... I hear a Michael Bublé song coming on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6f_vpoa0UFs

11350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 2/16/16
Look - I am very well aware that regardless of the Bill Lawrence vs Texas exists to Federally nullify any state legislation that counters the Federal mandate.

So by MY standards that means the state legislation, while being updated as this bill was being, should reflect the Federal order as that is how it should work. I'm not saying they went out of their way to make a Bill to outlaw homosexuality, I am saying they intentionally left an animal cruelty Bill that not only compares homosexuality with bestiality - which is absolutely demeaning to anyone who is gay - but everyone apparently seems to be okay that skipping this section, where literally all you have to crossout is the word humankind,but the homosexuality debate (which is not debatable at this point) is seen as a matter of personal pride in resisting and not needed to be changed at the state level because the federal level already covers it. That mentality disgusts me, and that is not a way to have a true culture shift that grants acceptance. As everyone keeps repeatedly pointing out, the Bill is on animal cruelty, so keeping a portion of homosexuality, in the portion of bestiality, seems rather stupid.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.