The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

Gay Marriage Updates By State

The Duluth City Council just passed a resolution 6-2-1 in opposition to Minnesota's anti-marriage amendment!!!

I was at the hearing. NOT ONE person who spoke was opposed to the resolution, whether in the audience or on the council.
 
scream4ever said:
The Duluth City Council just passed a resolution 6-2-1 in opposition to Minnesota's anti-marriage amendment!!!

I was at the hearing. NOT ONE person who spoke was opposed to the resolution, whether in the audience or on the council.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good foundation for a suit to overturn.
 
I will say in Minnesota, the point should be driven home that one of the main sponsers of this amendment was forced to resign because of her affair.
 
The biggest test will be in November. I can't stand Obama but also know that if a Republician gets in there, rights for us will be sent back decades.
 
Ninja108 said:
The biggest test will be in November. I can't stand Obama but also know that if a Republician gets in there, rights for us will be sent back decades.
Click to expand...

Not just us -- the ONLY thing I can think of that would improve under Republicans is respect for the Second Amendment in the law and courts.
 
^ And even the threats to that have only been spotty and half-hearted. Obama isn't "trying to take our guns away" either, though some people attribute that to him. Under
Republicans, the Second Amendment status wouldn't change all that much, because even those politicians who are gun-haters realize that going aggressively against the Second is a non-starter in the USA, even to this day.
 
frankfrank said:
^ And even the threats to that have only been spotty and half-hearted. Obama isn't "trying to take our guns away" either, though some people attribute that to him. Under
Republicans, the Second Amendment status wouldn't change all that much, because even those politicians who are gun-haters realize that going aggressively against the Second is a non-starter in the USA, even to this day.
Click to expand...

No, Obama is just appointing enemies of the Second Amendment to the courts.

There are Republicans waiting for a majority in Congress so they can roll back some of the laws presently on the books on the federal level, and let the states decide -- and some who want to eliminate ALL federal laws restricting firearms (which is, after all, in line with "shall not be infringed").
 
frankfrank said:
Corrected for truth
Click to expand...

No, you made it wrong -- the added statement is total truth. "Shall not be infringed" means not only aren't there to be laws about firearms, there aren't to be laws about anything peripherally connected to firearms.

Though I see the humor in striking out the firearms part, that's not quite true, either -- they just want to eliminate 90%.

And often, they have a good point.
 
"With Washington now firmly in the mix we must be vigilant and decisive as a community. All the developments are likely to be rapid and sudden. I think we can expect to see more Steve Litzows out there as Republican opposition continues thawing."

Well that didn't take long:

http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.c...ge-equality-bill-with-strong-bipartisan-vote/

WOW, a Republican candidate for state attorney general voted in favor of a resolution endorsing marriage equality.

http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.c...gns-on-to-washingtons-marriage-equality-bill/

"I would feel diminished by denying another human the ability to exercise those same rights and freedoms."

That's from a Republican people.

We can all thank Cuomo and the New York Senate Republicans for starting this trend!!!
 
"In New Jersey we will need at least three Republican senators and five assembly members to override an inevitable veto from Gov. Christie. That is if the entire Democratic caucus votes for the bill, unlikely. Still, that is not too many that it seems unfeasible, and New York serves as good a precedent in that regard. Note that the membership of the General Assembly (lower house) is subject to change with some Republican deaths lately, so the difficulty in override vote can change as well. I have seen a suggestion that in the event of a veto that cannot be beaten, a constitution amendment be sent to the voters."

Another option is for Christie to just not sign it, in which case it would become law after 45 days. He could say that with the court case in the state going forward, he doesn't want to waste state resources on something in which there is a good chance that it won't go his way.

"In Maryland, I don't know where to go for the movable opinions among the delegates. But, it is only one house we need to work on at least. Our governor is going to throw his lobbying support behind it. In any event, we believe the deciding votes can be counted on one hand. Like Maine and Washington, citizens can petition to overturn any new statute."

I've heard that there are 10 undecided delegates in the House. That's a lot considering we were short by only 1 or 2 votes last year. I also wouldn't be surprised if some of the ones who flip-flopped on gay marriage last year will come back around.
 
JockBoy87 said:
Why would he do that?

Most politicians do whatever furthers their career, with rare exceptions. If he has any political aspirations at all he will put his pen to the veto line faster than a dog to its dinner.

It doesn't appear to me as though Christie is looking for an excuse like being constrained by the limitations of 'state resources.' Actually, this isn't about 'state resources' to either side, either, and if it were about the economy, Republicans would appreciate the stimulus to the marriage industry, social halls, catering, printers, dress makers, and others to which millions of dollars gay couples bring.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying it's an option. He could also do what the governor of Vermont did, veto it and basically encourage the legislature to override said veto.

As far as political aspirations, our side continues to have accelerated support. 2016 is 4 years away. 4 years is light years on an issue like gay marriage. Like I said, just ignoring it is his best bet IMO (in fact, many political stragetists have suggested just this to Republican politicians).
 
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) — The Washington state Legislature is on the verge of having enough support to approve gay marriage, with votes continuing to realign in the state Senate, according to a tally by The Associated Press.


The AP has reached out to all 49 state senators over the past week and found that more lawmakers are firmly supporting gay marriage than opposing it, by a margin of 22-18. The measure needs 25 votes to pass the Senate.
Click to expand...


http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20120111/UPDATE/120111017/1001


The numbers are looking good for Washington.
 
scream4ever said:
I'm just saying it's an option. He could also do what the governor of Vermont did, veto it and basically encourage the legislature to override said veto.

As far as political aspirations, our side continues to have accelerated support. 2016 is 4 years away. 4 years is light years on an issue like gay marriage. Like I said, just ignoring it is his best bet IMO (in fact, many political stragetists have suggested just this to Republican politicians).
Click to expand...

I agree with Jockboy, if Christie wants to run for pres in 2016 (likely) he will veto this.

Most Republicans will still be against gay marriage in 2016.
 
Keep up the updates JockBoy and everyone else. I check this thread 3-4 times a day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top