Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:47 PM   #51
jlasoon
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by komodrone View Post
still not sure why people oppose gay marriage. opposing people has nothing to lose and it's a win for everyone else.
How do I benefit from this? Please explain.
jlasoon is offline   2
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:48 PM   #52
el-John-o
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Missouri
Quote:
Originally Posted by /V\acpower View Post
Well, I still prefer mariage to be a government issue than a religious one.
I just think they should be seperate. Religious folks have rights too, including to restrict things because of their understanding of morality. Let the government marry people of the same sex, and let the churches decide whether or not they'd like to participate in it. You may or may not agree with the religious organizations decision, but you don't have to participate with them either! And, taking away one persons rights and giving it to someone else isn't any more equality. Like it or not, agree with it or not, religious institutions also have rights!
__________________
Windows7 PC - Phenom II 965@4GHz x4 Cores, 16GB DDR3-2133, Radeon HD7970 | iPhone 5 32GB | iPad Air WiFi+LTE 128GB | Mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13", Dual 256GB SSD's in RAID 0, 16GB DDR3-1600
el-John-o is offline   5
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:49 PM   #53
tann
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nottingham, England
Absolutely fantastic, not just that Apple are but that 59 others are.

Marriage is something that anyone should be able to do. It shouldn't matter what gender you are.
__________________
2013 13" MacBook Air i5/8GB/256GB || Silver 64GB iPhone 6 || 32GB Cellular Silver iPad rMini!
Follow me on Twitter!
tann is offline   7
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:49 PM   #54
swissmann
macrumors 6502a
 
swissmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Utah Alps
The issue aside I am curious why the popular vote from the people of the United States can/should be overturned by a court. How does that represent the people better than the people voting themselves?
__________________
Always looking for a faster Mac.
swissmann is offline   2
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:50 PM   #55
firestarter
macrumors Demi-God
 
firestarter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Good.

The Church doesn't have a monopoly on marriage... although they're close to a monopoly on bigotry.
firestarter is offline   26
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:50 PM   #56
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by taeclee99 View Post
My prediction is that the Supreme Court in a narrow 5-4 decision will affirm Prop 8 on the basis that Marriage is a state issue not a federal one. Individual states will be left to determine what constitutes marriage.
Of course it's a federal issue - which is why SCOTUS will also strike down DOMA.

If a heterosexual gets married in NY, their marriage is still recognized in Texas. They still get Federal benefits and protections. A gay couple that gets married in NY doesn't get those benefits and protections. Hopefully the elimination of DOMA will set homosexual marriage on the same path.

SCOTUS made interracial marriage legal and they'll do the same for gay marriage. If they hadn't ruled correctly in Loving vs Virginia, there might still be some states where it was illegal.
Moyank24 is offline   11
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:51 PM   #57
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Too bad Apple has to be PC like most other big corporations. What if someone wants to marry two women, or a man wants to marry a woman and another man, or wants to marry his dog. Should we be supporting that too because it might affect his workplace morale?
__________________
"When we se something huge and powerful we aspire to make it small and meaningful." Jony Ive 
Rogifan is offline   1
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:52 PM   #58
jlasoon
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by swissmann View Post
The issue aside I am curious why the popular vote from the people of the United States can/should be overturned by a court. How does that represent the people better than the people voting themselves?
Ain't "Mob Rule" glorious?
jlasoon is offline   8
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:52 PM   #59
camnchar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SLC, Utah
Send a message via AIM to camnchar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nunyabinez View Post
With the ease of divorce and the numbers of children born outside of a marriage, the government should no longer be involved in marriage. The problem is, How do you get out of it?
Change it to contract law, where it should have been in the first place.
__________________
Apple //c, 1 MHz, 128k RAM, 5.25" floppy drive, 1-button mouse
camnchar is offline   0
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:52 PM   #60
rdowns
macrumors Penryn
 
rdowns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by el-John-o View Post
I just think they should be seperate. Religious folks have rights too, including to restrict things because of their understanding of morality. Let the government marry people of the same sex, and let the churches decide whether or not they'd like to participate in it. You may or may not agree with the religious organizations decision, but you don't have to participate with them either! And, taking away one persons rights and giving it to someone else isn't any more equality. Like it or not, agree with it or not, religious institutions also have rights!

Religion has no right to discriminate against others. And how the hell is religion losing any right if gays can marry?
rdowns is offline   19
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:52 PM   #61
flatfoot99
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by swissmann View Post
The issue aside I am curious why the popular vote from the people of the United States can/should be overturned by a court. How does that represent the people better than the people voting themselves?
My question too... why bother having a vote if it can be overturned?
flatfoot99 is offline   2
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:53 PM   #62
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Too bad Apple has to be PC like most other big corporations. What if someone wants to marry two women, or a man wants to marry a woman and another man, or wants to marry his dog. Should we be supporting that too because it might affect his workplace morale?
It has absolutely nothing to do with "workplace morale" and everything to do with the rights we have as Americans.

I'm still waiting for those who oppose gay marriage to start picketing and protesting those who get divorced....
Moyank24 is offline   14
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:53 PM   #63
Jetson
macrumors 6502a
 
Jetson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by swissmann View Post
The issue aside I am curious why the popular vote from the people of the United States can/should be overturned by a court. How does that represent the people better than the people voting themselves?
The Supreme Court exists to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
Jetson is offline   32
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:53 PM   #64
Nunyabinez
macrumors 6502a
 
Nunyabinez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Provo, UT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eduardo1971 View Post
Interesting (and very poor) comparison.

You equal the marriage of two human beings with that of canine?
No, what he is saying is that once you say that marriage is NOT only one man with one woman, how do you justify denying anyone who want to marry anyone else, or multiple anyones, as long as they all consent. (not sure how a dog consents, but maybe it could)
__________________
iMac w/Retina 4GHz; 27" iMac, 3.4 GHz i7; 15" MBP, 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo; 13" MBA 1.7 GHz i5; iPad (3rd Gen); iPad Mini; iPhone 6+;
Nunyabinez is offline   1
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:53 PM   #65
VolceOntra
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlasoon View Post
How do I benefit from this? Please explain.
You benefit in that your children will be able to love whoever they want and marry them. They'll have tax breaks and medical visit rights. They won't be able to get fired because they are gay.... Unless of coarse that sounds horrible to you. They'll be able to love more freely. With less stigma.
VolceOntra is offline   20
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:54 PM   #66
Feed Me
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Location Location
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackberryroid View Post
Their CEO is gay, what would you expect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
Well this is a big DUH.

Considering Tim Cook is gay.
I think this is a BIG DUH even if Tim was hetero.
Feed Me is offline   4
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:54 PM   #67
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by el-John-o View Post
I just think they should be seperate. Religious folks have rights too, including to restrict things because of their understanding of morality. Let the government marry people of the same sex, and let the churches decide whether or not they'd like to participate in it. You may or may not agree with the religious organizations decision, but you don't have to participate with them either! And, taking away one persons rights and giving it to someone else isn't any more equality. Like it or not, agree with it or not, religious institutions also have rights!
Because when gays finally are allowed to marry, they'll all be rushing to get married in the institutions that have been discriminating against them for decades.

Please.
Moyank24 is offline   9
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:55 PM   #68
jlasoon
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Orlando, FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Too bad Apple has to be PC like most other big corporations. What if someone wants to marry two women, or a man wants to marry a woman and another man, or wants to marry his dog. Should we be supporting that too because it might affect his workplace morale?
No one should give a crap about the morality of another indiodual. Live and let live.
jlasoon is offline   4
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:55 PM   #69
leon44
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Blount View Post
So since we are breaking this barrier, I can marry my dog now right?
If you and your dog wanted to I would not be offended or see an issue with it or try and prevent it, and neither should anybody else.

Maybe it's just my upbringing but I can't understand how somebody can have such an issue with homosexuality unless they're trying to supress their own.
leon44 is offline   6
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:55 PM   #70
mrfrosty
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by loft3 View Post
I think your dog would be too smart to marry you.

The comparing gay marriage to beastiality tripe gets old.

A marriage is about consent. It involves both people understanding the institution and their willingness to enter into it.

Animals cannot speak, much less demonstrate any kind of understanding about human marriage. A human could never prove that an animal gave its informed consent so a marriage between man and dog wouldn't be allowed. This renders the "What next?!?!?! Humans marrying animals?!?!?!" argument laughable to anyone with a brain.
It's about more than consent, it's about love & commitment and to be fair dogs do seem to exhibit that ! Anyway, whether is MM, MF, FF i really don't care we should be able to marry who we choose. If a guy want's to marry his dog then if both parties agree and it's legal then who are you or I to deny them the right.
__________________
MrFrosty
mrfrosty is offline   1
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:55 PM   #71
bigpoppamac31
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Blount View Post
So since we are breaking this barrier, I can marry my dog now right?
It may come to that eventually. If we break one of God's commands why not another?? Once we start rolling down the hill it's not easy to stop it. I'm not going to boycott Apple or anything. I'll still use their products. But I certainly disagree on their position. I as a Christian believe in the "traditional" view of marriage as one man and one woman. Nonetheless I've used Apple products all my life and that won't change anytime soon. I wouldn't even accept a Windows PC for free. LOL
bigpoppamac31 is offline   4
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:55 PM   #72
el-John-o
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Missouri
Quote:
Originally Posted by swissmann View Post
The issue aside I am curious why the popular vote from the people of the United States can/should be overturned by a court. How does that represent the people better than the people voting themselves?
Well, in theory, the courts are there to make sure that what we the people vote for (or congress votes for) doesn't infringe on others rights or violate the constitution of the US or of the individual state. In theory. Modern day though, the Supreme Court becomes politics-as-usual.

But in theory, if it WAS a constitutional issue, the court would force us to amend the constitution instead of allowing the passage of a law that contradicts it. It's one of the reasons the gun debate is so heated. Lots of states and local areas are passing laws restricting firearms. (Thus we would need a constitutional amendment to restrict firearms further) However, some believe the constitution doesn't allow it, so it'll be up to the courts to decide the scope of the 2nd amendment.
__________________
Windows7 PC - Phenom II 965@4GHz x4 Cores, 16GB DDR3-2133, Radeon HD7970 | iPhone 5 32GB | iPad Air WiFi+LTE 128GB | Mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13", Dual 256GB SSD's in RAID 0, 16GB DDR3-1600
el-John-o is offline   1
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:57 PM   #73
Feed Me
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Location Location
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Blount View Post
So since we are breaking this barrier, I can marry my dog now right?
Feed Me is offline   7
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:57 PM   #74
yadmonkey
macrumors 65816
 
yadmonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western Spiral
Quote:
Originally Posted by firestarter View Post
The Church doesn't have a monopoly on marriage... although they're close to a monopoly on bigotry.
You have just won the most hypocritical post of the day award.
yadmonkey is offline   7
Old Feb 26, 2013, 05:57 PM   #75
Jetson
macrumors 6502a
 
Jetson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon44 View Post
If you and your dog wanted to I would not be offended or see an issue with it or try and prevent it, and neither should anybody else
I don't see why some people automatically equate two human beings (who are of the same gender) getting married with marrying an animal.

It's stupid beyond belief.
Jetson is offline   27

Closed Thread
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pa. gov: Gay marriage is like marriage of siblings likemyorbs Politics, Religion, Social Issues 4 Oct 5, 2013 02:54 AM
Apple Wins Patent Dispute Against Mirror Worlds After U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Case MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 30 Jul 1, 2013 06:21 PM
Apple Issues Statement in Support of Supreme Court Gay Marriage Rulings MacRumors Politics, Religion, Social Issues 366 Jun 26, 2013 05:04 PM
Nevada Assemblyman Comes Out as Gay During Gay Marriage Debate bradl Politics, Religion, Social Issues 1 Apr 24, 2013 08:06 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:42 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC