Comments

Big Bad wrote on Nov 7, 2008 2:13 PM:

" It's good to be a wolf. "




Democratically Speaking wrote on Nov 6, 2008 3:38 PM:

" Liberals and gays whine about *democracy* well, in a democracy the majority rules. Maybe you'd like we return to a republic? Then the majority wouldn't make all the rules.

Definition of a democracy? Three wolves and a sheep deciding what's for lunch. "




Toni wrote on Nov 6, 2008 8:55 AM:

" Evil, stupid people. you want to make everyone as miserable as your selves. "




another to disappointed wrote on Nov 5, 2008 10:30 PM:

" Nothing gives any one person the right, but the constitution gives a majority the right. A majority of California agreed with us.

Why is it that no one is happy with a civil union? There's nothing saying they can't fall in love and have one of these.... "




to disappointed wrote on Nov 5, 2008 6:25 PM:

" Lucky for us, you are part of a minority who believes this way. Every year, more and more states are approving constitutional amenmends to ban gay marriage. Thankfully we live in a country where the majority rules. "




disappointed wrote on Nov 5, 2008 8:24 AM:

" What gives anybody the right to tell somebody who they can and cannot marry. It is our god given right to fall in love with whoever our heart chooses no matter sex, race , religion or anything else. How would you feel about being told no you are not allowed to marry the love of your life? I think that it is wrong to pass this prop. "




Wrong Again Is Wrong Again wrote on Nov 4, 2008 1:55 PM:

" California voters have already voted to ban gay marriage and then their liberal judges overruled the law. A constitutional amendment will prevent judges from doing this in AZ. "




Wrong again wrote on Nov 4, 2008 6:52 AM:

" Alex. You and many others are wrong again. In the eyes of the law marriage has nothing to do with religion. And when we're talking about a constitutional ammendment, we're talking about the law. No one has proposed an ammendment to the Bible. At least not yet. A legal marriage is a financial partnership between two individuals. And for the record the law as it stands does not allow legal marriages between same sex couples. Prop 102 is redundant and worthless. Maybe we need a constitutional ammendment to set the speed limit or oppose carjacking. Where do we stop? "




Thank you Alex wrote on Nov 3, 2008 11:17 PM:

" I agree with Alex. "




Alex wrote on Nov 3, 2008 3:37 PM:

" To say that this is discriminatory towards gays is a vast overstatement. Marriage is, and always has been, a religious ceremony. To take that ceremony and introduce something that conflicts with that religion is discriminatory. Voting yes on 102 is not taking away your right to be married, it is protecting our right to keep the ceremony of marriage sacred. "




Not in AZ wrote on Nov 3, 2008 12:43 PM:

" Can you believe this? Teachers forcing kindergartners to sign gay pledge cards. KINDERGARTNERS!!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,445865,00.html

This is just the beginning. "




YES on 102 wrote on Nov 3, 2008 10:11 AM:

" I've read and seen multiple news stories of how states which allow gay marriage are now teaching about it in grade school. I never learned about straight marriage in school, so why do they need to learn about gay marriage. My niece's school in California just had an "acceptance" day. THIS IS WHY EVERYONE IS AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE. It's being forced down our throats and affecting the way we choose to raise our children. "




Jill R. wrote on Nov 3, 2008 9:26 AM:

" Monica? Lets have a lesson: Mother's and Father's raise children, irresponsible men and women produce children.

A biological donor male is not a father and, likewise a Meth-head female is not a mother.

Children require both role models, man and woman He did make them, in order to develop into fully well balanced grown-ups.

There is no issue avoided here: available freely birth control, mis-guided women's liberation (which has been anything but liberating), and now we're adding homosexual marriage????

Isn't THAT the issue? "




Monica Stokum wrote on Nov 1, 2008 3:31 PM:

" Ridiculous, the issue is avoided here that often enough times a mother and father..male and female don't even marry or stay together when they have a child. Children are probably raised the best and happiest in an environment where there is love, and successfull caring compassionate parents, regardless of the sex...
This proposition is so completely ignorant and biast and antiquadated..it is people like you who make the children of gay couples suffer most, making the children, easily influenced and ignorant believe that their is something disgusting and wrong about being gay.
You are the problem andt heprimarypromoterofhateandintolerance,disgusting. "




Michael wrote on Oct 31, 2008 9:04 PM:

" hey bwana, it sure is easy to use others' standards against them when you don't have any of your own. "




The Green Man wrote on Oct 31, 2008 10:07 AM:

" So now, lets add GLBT to who can marry ON TOP OF the no-fault divorce and birth control available in high schools and see where our society goes.

I am using the name The Green Man (of the harvest) due to the season, the pagan holiday today, and in no way associated to the looser mayor of Safford - FYI

btw, tonight the Green Man has the goddess of the wood - don't look Catholics! (since you forced us underground)

celebrate! Its Samain! (no GLBT's in that tradition) "




The Green Man wrote on Oct 31, 2008 10:02 AM:

" To "Wow" you make an interesting point. Those of us who qualify for AARP can remember a time when marriage was a legal contract between two people. In those days even churches viewed marriage as a contract between a man and a women to combine as one before God.

Then came no-fault divorce and birth control and everything changed. We are now two full generations out from the days before no-fault divorce and just look at the fine condition of our society.

Sometimes the way things used to be done had a good reason. "




Former Safford Resident wrote on Oct 30, 2008 12:31 PM:

" I'm for prop 102, but I did see a funny bumper sticker advocating the other side. "Let gay people marry! Let them be as miserable as the rest of us!" "




Former Safford Resident wrote on Oct 30, 2008 12:29 PM:

" Pots Kettles may have taken his/her point one step too far, but how about answering the rest of it. What is next? Are you going to vote to allow bigamy or even, the horror of it all, polygamy? If not, why not? What does it matter to you what goes on in my home? I really don't think anyone would vote for it, but when it passes, that is when I'll consider voting to let the gays marry. "




VOTE NO wrote on Oct 29, 2008 7:17 PM:

" Let them get married. It is not going to affect you in any way. Just let it be and get over it because either way they are going to be together and your going to see it. You cant ignore it. Just butt out of their lives! "




WOW wrote on Oct 29, 2008 5:06 PM:

" Is amazing how so many can speak out about keeping marriage sacred when as a society people marry and divorce as often as they change jobs. Many couples now choose to live together and not marry and they are raising families. Why do we condone those of the same sex who want to make a commitment to each other. There are many kids who have divorced parents who have several "aunties" or "uncles" who stay the night and are nowhere to be found in the morning. I believe that love and commitment is what makes a family strong. "




Chuck Norris wrote on Oct 29, 2008 1:23 PM:

" Rainbows are what happens when Chuck Norris roundhouse kicks Richard Simmons. "




Oregonian wrote on Oct 29, 2008 12:48 PM:

" I live in Oregon and there is quite a bit of diversity up here. There is this kid in my son's class who has two moms. They split up and then he had 4 moms. Two of the moms split up again and he has 4 moms and 2 aunties. When you meet him he says, "My name is X and I have 4 moms." One of his mom's cars has 2 bumper stickers. One says, "I Kiss Girls" and the other says "Butch Love." "




Pearls wrote on Oct 29, 2008 12:39 PM:

" First, can we please stop comparing the struggles faced by blacks and gays. There is no comparison. It is unsulting. Second, why all the attacks on only the Mormon church. Correct me if I am wrong but Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Baptists and a host of other religions have all spoken out against same sex marriage. Third, most rights between a man and woman can be obtained by a gay couple though civil unions and other legal paperwork. We are asking for the protection of the sanctity of marriage or what's left of it. "




The Green Man wrote on Oct 29, 2008 10:37 AM:

" Jaram - Rights are purchased through Responsibility. That's why children have few "rights" (because they have very little responsibility).

When everyone abdicates their responsibilities to the power of the state, who then possess their rights? The state. This is how cultures and societies loose their rights.

Secondly, when *everything* under the sun becomes called "a human right" then the real and true rights granted by Nature and Nature's God" become worthless - in political science its called "rights inflation" - just like currency, the more there is the less its worth. "




JARAM wrote on Oct 29, 2008 7:13 AM:

" If they made people take a test before having children think of the wonderful parents we would have in this world instead of tons of apathy. Lets put out a proposition stating you can't have kids unless you pass an intelligence test first. Maybe a DNA test to make sure the geen pool is compatible also.
GET REAL YOU CAN NOT REGULATE EVERY DAY LIFE FOR EVERY SINGLE PERSON! WHAT ABOUT OUR HUMAN RIGHTS! "




The Green Man wrote on Oct 28, 2008 9:41 AM:

" Marriage is defined in the Bible. Oh, I forgot, those of you wanting to redefine marriage worship something else right... Hmmm... so, if we open marriage to Adam and Steve or Eve and Linda, how about re-considering plural marriage too? And while we're at it, lets lower the age of consent to 12 ... why not? They already know the basics thanks to the government schools.

Wow! the possibilities are endless!! Maybe the Wiccan coven in the Valley can come out of the closet too? "




Ray Dearman wrote on Oct 28, 2008 7:37 AM:

" Prop 102 is a way to stop Gay marrige, so I would like to ask a few questions of those voteing for Prop 102.

Is this your way to say that every American that pays his or her taxes should not be allowed to share in the same rights you enjoy, even if they are a Gay couple? Since you say marriage is meant to produce children, should a man and woman first have to take a test to be sure they can have a child? Should they be forced to adobt the unwanted children in America? "




to each his own wrote on Oct 24, 2008 5:25 PM:

" vote no on 102

I don't think we need to worry about a shortage of people marrying and having children.

Who are you to decide who someone can or shoukd love?

Times are changing --- a black , a woman for president? OH NO!
What is the world coming to.
Should we have a law against that too! "




Marriage sucks wrote on Oct 24, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Traditional marriage sucks. Ask any married man. Maybe it's time we explore new horizons. "




Chuck Fan wrote on Oct 24, 2008 12:20 PM:

" If Chuck Norris wanted to marry seven guys who would tell him no? "




What about this wrote on Oct 24, 2008 12:16 PM:

" If a guy wants to marry a carton of eggs does that make him a a polygamist? "




Doc Johnson wrote on Oct 24, 2008 10:40 AM:

" bwana, funny - 100 years ago anyone talking about gay marriage was considered a nutcase. Talk about a black president would've been even worse.

Not saying anything is wrong with either, just the point that times and viewpoints change. "




Disappointed wrote on Oct 24, 2008 9:24 AM:

" There is no need to publically express your dissapointment towards someone for expressing their opinion, especially if you say that you always respected this person. I know Mrs. Crotts and she is a very nice and caring woman and doesnt deserve the below comment. "




bwana wrote on Oct 24, 2008 6:03 AM:

" Pots...
That's because anyone who mentions marrying pets is automatically outed as a nutcase. you need to get real....people who would marry a pet are psychologically impaired and need help...gays and pluralists do not necessarily fall into that category....Unless they are religious fundamentalists too, then it's a given. "




Pots Kettles wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:17 PM:

" Funny, no one wants to answer my previous question.... "




Whats the big deal wrote on Oct 23, 2008 2:07 PM:

" I would think the Mormon community would be against the wording of "ONE woman". "




No right wrote on Oct 23, 2008 11:29 AM:

" I can't tell you how bad I want to kick over every yes on 102 sign. The government should be focusing on the economy and getting our troops out of Iraq. Instead they're trying to control individual's personal lives. I don't think it is fair. We should be able to marry whoever we want. Isn't America about freedom of choice. NO in 102. "




To WWJD wrote on Oct 22, 2008 12:12 PM:

" You just demonstrated how very little you know. "




Facts on the case wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:42 AM:

" The Sunday edition of Tucson's main newspaper, The Arizona Daily Star, which is the "conservative" newspaper in the city denounced Prop. 102 and urged its readers to vote no. This proposition takes aim at the freedoms we have in the greates county on earth. Don't take the road that leads to the U.S. becoming like China. Vote no and keep the U.S. free! "




becky wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:11 AM:

" I have two words to all of the 102 supporters:WHO CARES!! In today's fragile economic and global crisis, WHO CARES who a man or woman decides to sleep with or marry. I see all of the signs around town and think, I cannot believe these are my neighbors. I am ashamed at the ignorance of the 102 supporters. Your very thoughts are causing the negative opinions of Americans/ Arizonans around the world.Spend your money and time on real issues,like child abuse,medical advancement, cultural development. Please open your eyes and see the bigger picture. "




WWJD wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:22 AM:

" Jesus has been dead for over 2000 years people get over it already. "




Peggy Crotts...I am so disappointed wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:42 PM:

" Mrs. Crotts, I always thought of you as a progressive, intelligent, open and thoughtful person. How could you sign onto this hateful statement? You are so well respected and knowledgeable. Why waste your time on this non-issue that is hurting no one? There are so many vital issues out there. The state of our education system for one is something you are familiar with. Why not stick to that and stop trying to take rights from others? "




Rome is burning wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:39 PM:

" It's interesting to watch our country repeat the mistakes of other empires that led to failure, revolution or complete destruction. Way to go you haters of everything this country was founded upon. "




State of the Union wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:00 PM:

" I respect your OPINION 100% of how you feel about the homosexual lifestyle. But your religious views should stay in your home, your church and your heart. Everyone is entitled to the same rights. Arizona has a divorce statistic of 64%. So more than half of heterosexual marriages fail. How can you spend so much time and energy protecting something that YOU, the HETERO'S can't seam to get right yourself. The majority of the US is non LDS. So does that mean that since we don't worship the book of mormon you can't either? "




bwana wrote on Oct 21, 2008 6:05 PM:

" Jesus didn't throw out the queers!
He threw out the hypocrites who pretended to know God's will....
And I've a pretty good idea that's what will happen again....Might be a good idea to start engaging in the discipleship of agape instead of hating people who are different than you. "




Jason wrote on Oct 21, 2008 2:44 PM:

" Ignorants keep asking why cant we accept somethig we deem filthy or evil. Christ refused to except the filth in the temple and cast the garbage out. So when we do it we are considered evil for not excepting filth. Seems to me Christ set the example to clean his fathers house. So dont quote a christian verse and then tell me to except that which Christ himself would not and WILL not except. Thanks for the letter Derek. "




concerned wrote on Oct 21, 2008 1:48 PM:

" why does the government have to get involved in personal issues? "




Pots Kettles wrote on Oct 21, 2008 12:13 PM:

" The sad part is that when the polygamy topic comes up in a few years, everyone who is preaching acceptance will suddenly change their speech.

Is it really acceptance you preach, or is it only acceptance for SOME people, not others?

bwana, Maria, Therea, s., Love one Another, Terry, U. Sinclair, thought - is it ok to marry 2 women? 2 men? a pet? Where is your acceptance you preach? "




A thought. . . wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:30 AM:

" Since there is, how can you fight for legislation to be passed that is based on morality influenced by religion? Every American has the right to live how they want. Noone is forced to accept anything. Every person has their own free will. You are not required to support gay marriage. You just need to be more opened-minded and willing to understand but not neccacarily agree with others views. I see this same problem with the article on the Morman temple. Let people live their lives. Who are you to interfer? "




A thought. . . wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:20 AM:

" His article is titled, "Is Homosexuality Unnatural." I suggest you all read it. My postings here are to ask; "Who defines morality?" I feel that homosexuals should have the same rights and those in a traditional marriage. Although some states will not accept gay marriage they still all the same benifits to same-sex partnerships that they do to traditional man and woman couples. I believe that it is wrong to force clergy or others to support gay marriage. But is there not a separation betweem church and state? "




A thought. . . wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:17 AM:

" The question here is; On what premise do you define morality? There are many different theories defining morality. The is the Divine Command Theory the author of this article states. Socrates asked a question concerning this type of thinking. "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" Can you all answer that. There is also the Theory of Natural Law. a professor at Pace University named Burton Leiser wrote an essay delving into the topic. "




bwana wrote on Oct 21, 2008 10:04 AM:

" I am starting to feel better about our society thanks to all you folks who disagree with prop 102! I was starting to think I was the only one left with some consideration for diversity. "




U. Sinclair wrote on Oct 21, 2008 9:32 AM:

" If we, as a society, feel that marriage must be legally defined as exclusively between one man and one woman as a method for preserving the "family" and haulting the tearing of our social fabric, should we not also make divorce illegal? The line of thinking for pro-102 supporters is not only bigoted towards homosexuals, it is also bigoted towards single parents. If these supporters do not want gay marriage in their lives they have the option of not marrying someone of the same gender. Freedom sometimes means having to accept lifestyles you are not comfortable with. "




Terry wrote on Oct 21, 2008 7:14 AM:

" Why would we ever want to write discrimination into our constitution when we have worked so hard to create a society where many diverse people can live together. Take this energy to help prevent divorce, pre-marriage pregnancies, adultery, adoption services. Why provoke such division and hate. Please vote No on proposition 102 and learn to live in a diverse society. "




Redundant wrote on Oct 21, 2008 7:14 AM:

" Arizona already has a law against gay marriage. This proposition is redundant. Kind of reminds me of the 13th and 14th ammendments to the U.S. Constitution. A constitution is supposed to be a steadfast document hence the name "constitution". Not some toy of political whimsy. "




Love One Another wrote on Oct 20, 2008 6:13 PM:

" I agree with you s. We should not tell people how to live. I personally think we are all human and we should ALL have the same rights. We should love one another no matter how people choose to live the life they want to live. Personally, I will not be discriminating and I vote No on this proposition!! Love One Another! "




s. wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:55 PM:

" It's ridiculous that this is even being debated. no one should have the right to tell anyone else to live by certain traditions that won't affect anyone but themselves. "




Doc Johnson wrote on Oct 20, 2008 4:47 PM:

" Lets think forward a few years. We allow marriage between gays. Then what? Is a man and 2 women still illegal? Why? Same discrimination it sounds like. How about a man to his dog? No one seems to think ahead, the line has to be drawn somewhere.

I'll vote yes on 102. If it doesn't pass, maybe I'll look for more wives. Sounds like a win-win situation for me. "




JARAM wrote on Oct 20, 2008 3:22 PM:

" TO CORRECTION! Why is it that people say move if you don't like something? Aren't we all entitled to our opinion. Thanks God we are still a free Country where everyone can have their own beliefs and ideas.
When you speak of marriage, is it really a government issue or a biblical issue?
Gay marriage is not for me, but who am I to say what is right for everyone else? "




Correction wrote on Oct 20, 2008 2:43 PM:

" The last proposition on gay marriage was written poorly and would have affected many more people and families, which is why it didn't pass. The current proposition is very specific to define marriage as between one man and one woman. It will surely pass as we all know Arizona is not a liberal state. You're more than welcome to move to California if you don't like it. "




Therea wrote on Oct 20, 2008 9:58 AM:

" Is this really where our society has ended up, spewing so much hate that people can't even see clearly anymore? The issue is this; Arizona voted on this two years ago and the majority of voters chose not to amend the constitution. Why is this on the ballot again, and why aren't politicians debating the mortgage crisis and the economy rather than the definition of marriage? Politicians need to stay out of marriage and focus on the real things that are of concern to people. VOTE NO ON PROP 102! "




Maria wrote on Oct 20, 2008 8:44 AM:

" In the United States of America, where there is NO state religion a marriage contract is just that. A legal document signed, witnessed, and entered into public record. Any other meaning ascribed stems solely from one's religious belief. I really wish people would understand that religious beliefs really should not play a part in this. If gays and lesbians want to sign that contract to afford them both the rights of a married couple and the dangers that come with divorce then WHAT BUSINESS IS IT OF YOURS. This 'petition' is rooted in bible thumper homophobia. "




bwana wrote on Oct 20, 2008 5:41 AM:

" Funny how so many of the people who signed this letter are hispanics and mormons..I would have thought they'd be more sensitive about discrimination.
That's clearly what this letter is about; discriminating against a minority group. The people who signed this letter have forgotten where they come from.

John and Jean...You are denying gays the same rights that you already claim...Where is the christian compassion in that?

I'm not gay, but I do have a sense of justice for all. "




Bandito wrote on Oct 19, 2008 10:53 PM:

" John and Jean,
The repercussions are something you should think about. Perhaps that will compell you to action! "




John and Jean wrote on Oct 19, 2008 7:22 PM:

" AWESOME JOB well written and thankyou thankyou thankyou......we gotta work hard to keep this from happening in Arizona. Everyone seems to think we are taking rights away from the gay people, when in fact they have no more rights than we do, nor should they.....The repercussions are something we really don't want to think about. "