Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by OnceUGoMac, Jul 31, 2006.
Looks like the U.S. isn't the only one.
You know, this is just stupid. Seriously.
I thought we were done with looking at people as "men," women," "black," or "white," when it came to the granting of rights and priveleges. Humans are humans.
This is no different that telling a white guy he can't marry a black woman.
Christ it's beyond comprehension for me. Equal rights are equal rights.
Why so many people are for stripping one group of citizens of a right that all others are granted....
I don't think any of my seven sisters, their husbands, or their collective 18 kids think I am a danger to their family unit.
I think the court got it right, civil unions for gays. In religion and in Govt Marriage has allways been with the Opposite sex. Marriage is what is, not what some would like it to be.
Removing religion from the equation, what do you see the difference is between a marriage and a civil union in the eyes of a government?
Less ceremony & more taxes?? you got me.
Not surprising in the slightest. British judges are well known for being 20 years behind the general population on social issues. This is a setback but not the end. They'll take the case to Europe next.
Exactly. The only argument to diffirentiate between mixed and same-sex marriage is religious.
And religion has no place in legislation.
Any taxes argument can't be made either, it's preposterous. What do you mean, tax breaks for mixed sex marriages? On what grounds? What happens when a gay man and woman who are both single choose to marry for the tax break?
"Is" and "has always been" is a pretty weak argument when we're talking about fundamental civil rights.
Oh God, I'm going to get banned again. Careful DHM.
Unlike the US, Britain does allow civil unions.
What I don't understand is how two guys getting hitched poses any threat whatsoever to society. Why are they putting the "traditional family unit" on a pedestal?
I see a pattern of so-called "traditional" people causing so many problems in this world. I am really just speechless. And pissed.
I think the "conservatives" hate the idea of gay marriage because it goes against everything they like to spout about gay people. They can't cope with the idea that same-sex couples can have loving monogamous relationships and build a life together. In their mind, a gay person has to be promiscuous, into drugs, prone to depression and self-hatred, and eventually die young of a sexually tranmitted disease. They simply can't tolerate anything outside of this stereotype.
Just one recent example of what he^ said.
mpw, you just ruined my day even more.
But no hard feelings, eh? This is precisely the sort of thing I had in mind.
Marriage has always changed and adapted to different cultures and has changed with time as well. You can't say that marriage is one thing for everyone in this world. So, should we go with marriage as it is defined in the Bible? Some rules about marriage defined in the Bibile:
Should the female getting married not have any say in who she marries? Should a father be able to marry off his daughter without her consent or will? After all, marriage doesn't change, right?
Marriage has changed and it will continue to change for as long as it is around.
Marriage is what it is, Man & Woman and they should be given Tax Breaks to help create more boys & girls so govt can tax the sh.. out of them when they grow up. Its a endless cycle throwing in Gay marriage is like throwing sand in a engine.
Wow- thanks for that. So we're sand in the engine? I don't even know quite how to respond to that.
BTW- uh, we gay people do raise families. I know that's hard for you to hear, but it's true.
Yeah but you not making little new tax payers!
So couples who can't have kids should probably only be allowed a civil partnership as well then. And if you decide not to have kids? Obviously that's just wrong and evil , but presumably people who choose that should only get a civil partnership as well. And post-menopausal women shouldn't be allowed to get married at all. And people who adopt or foster kids instead of squeezing another few out into an overpopulated world* should only be allowed a civil partnership as well, because obviously they're just not making the effort...
*Edit: No offence meant to those who have kids, just making the point in a slightly, er, meatheaded fashion, that marriage and kids are two different things entirely, and people choose things for different reasons.
adopting an unwanted child and providing a good home is one of the most noble things i can think of.
and the purpose of marriage is to form a family unit -- children or not -- which operates in a healthy society. that's gender-independent.
lee, scem, and everyone else: for the record, i fully support marriage rights for every adult. we'll get there, eventually.
Wont happen in my view, way way to many religions and control freaks like our current Congress & President who have allready spent your future childrens taxes. Now your telling them you arent going to create taxpayers who's money has allready been spent?
So you support gay marriage then, even though you don't believe it will happen?
Edit: By your posts above, no, you don't. Leave any real or imagined tax problem up to the government. Why do you not support it?