Calif.'s Top Court Blocks Gay Marriages

[wonderwench]

The rights and responsibilities of married partners are specified in family legal codes. I suspect a separate set of such would have to be developed for civil unions.

 

[Avatar4321]

First of all I'm not for it and I'm not against it. I just have one question. Who has the right to tell people who they can and can not marry? Just a question so please don't jump down my throat on this one.

I dunno. How about the definition itself? I mean you really cant have a union of an unrelated man and woman between two men or two women. Its an oxymoron. Its the same people who say triangles cant have four sides. Regardless how much you might want them to, its impossible.

But since people want to ignore and change the definition, hence changing the entire purpose IE to procreate and raise children and they want to do it in a means illegal and Unconstitutional IE breaking the law, its the rights of the people to protect Marriage. This ammendment will come up eventually. If Congress wont do anything we will just have to go through the second route to pass ammendments. Have the states call for the ammendment without going through Congress. I think we can find enough states that will go for it. Heck the South, midwest, and west excluding the coast should be enough.

 

[jon_forward]

several letters of the alphabet......the ability to unite in Gods house....and the gender of said participants..that be about it in my eyes...all else being thhe same...what say yea WW?

 

[Jmarie]

Originally posted by jon_forward
i would rather a child spend time/grow up with love in a home setting then to grow up without any love at all....reguardless of what type of couple adopts or raises them as long as its a loving home, and things are left behind closed doors...that would apply to single folks also. I know, we were adopted at birth.

I totally agree. If they have the love for that child and can keep it behind close doors. I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[Avatar4321]

So what would the difference be between a "marriage" and a "civil union" besides the genders of the participants?

One would have the right and ability to procreate. the other wouldnt.

 

[jon_forward]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
One would have the right and ability to procreate. the other wouldnt.

If something wierd ever did happen ...just call me P.T.Barnum

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by jon_forward
i would rather a child spend time/grow up with love in a home setting then to grow up without any love at all....reguardless of what type of couple adopts or raises them as long as its a loving home, and things are left behind closed doors...that would apply to single folks also. I know, we were adopted at birth.

It's impossible for homosexuals to teach morality and 'right and wrong' to kids

 

[jon_forward]

sorry Darrin but you are mistakin. I have had many gay friends over the years..the only thing wrong with them is they are not hetro..

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by jon_forward
sorry Darin but you are mistakin. I have had many gay friends over the years..the only thing wrong with them is they are not hetro..

Don't appologize for disagreements

It's like this - Somebody who teaches kids that it's just fine that they indulge their lusts for cock isn't right in the head. No matter how loving, it's condoning a deviant lifestyle. Nobody who calls themselves 'loving' could try to suggest to a kid that homosexuality (or other deviance) is 'okay'.

That's my pov.

 

[Jmarie]

where in the contitution does it say that i have to marry a man? i have looked and i can't found it. does anyone know what one it is?

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by Jmarie
where in the contitution does it say that i cant have sex with a horse? i have looked and i can't found it. does anyone know what one it is?

The founding fathers never assumed people wouldn't have good sense.

 

[wonderwench]

Originally posted by jon_forward
several letters of the alphabet......the ability to unite in Gods house....and the gender of said participants..that be about it in my eyes...all else being thhe same...what say yea WW?

I think the ability to unite in God's house is for religions to determine, not the government.

The government related rights and responsibilities should be focused on sharing of assets and liabilities, survivorship and custodianship in case of incapacity. Those are the things that are difficult for gays and lesbians now. I know several couples that have gone through the nightmare of not being able to visit their partners in the hospital due to not being family. That is an incredibly painful experience.

 

[jimnyc]

Looking good in Massachusetts too:

" Meanwhile, Massachusetts lawmakers gave preliminary approval to a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage but allow civil unions.

The amendment, which would strip gay couples of their court-granted marriage rights, must still weather several additional votes and anticipated legislative maneuvering by opponents. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm.../ap/20040311/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage_calif_3

 

[5stringJeff]

Public opinion is clear... marriage is for one man and one woman, only. No same sex, no mulitple partners, no animals, no children... one man and one woman. If your sexual preference takes you outside of those limitations, don't get married! It's that simple.

 

[Avatar4321]

where in the contitution does it say that i have to marry a man? i have looked and i can't found it. does anyone know what one it is?

Doesnt have to. Anything not written in the Constitution is up to the legistlature to decide. The people have decided.

Besides as ive said before, the Constitution doesnt say traingles cant have four sides. But come on people. use the brain.

 

[Jmarie]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Doesnt have to. Anything not written in the Constitution is up to the legistlature to decide. The people have decided.

Besides as ive said before, the Constitution doesnt say traingles cant have four sides. But come on people. use the brain.

If that's the case then why are they saying it's unconstitutional. if it doesn't say anything in it?

 

[Joz]

Originally posted by Jmarie
If that's the case then why are they saying it's unconstitutional. if it doesn't say anything in it?

The gays/lesbians HAVE the same right as everyone else in accordance with the Constitution. The fact they they want to be recognized as a 'union' is what's causing the problem. They want to have the same benefits as married people, but I'm not sure what all that entails.

Anyone who's read the thread, "Who's going to Heaven", knows I don't condone homosexuality. So, I guess it really doesn't matter if I don't understand exactly what they're asking for. If they're wanting to call their coupledom a marriage so be it. I can call my cat a monkey, doesn't make it so, but I can still call it that. I just don't see taking the sanctity of marriage and dignifying this perversness by legally recognizing it.

 

[Avatar4321]

An interesting side question. Who exactly marries a spouse to get the so called social benefits the government gives out (still havent figured out what those are yet)? I mean i could care less about any benefits. Im going to marry someone i get along with, love, and want to have children with. I have a feeling that most people are probably like that. (Senator Kerry being and obvious exception). So why on earth do we need more people marrying for the so called social hand outs of marriage (i still really havent any reason to believe there are any).

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Dmp-
Why shouldn't gay and lesbian couples be able to adopt children? Do you really think that gay couples will be telling their 12 year old child to engage in homosexual activities? One of my best friends is a lesbian who adopted a girl 4 years ago, I assure you she is not teaching her adopted daughter is the ways of homosexuality.. Homosexuality is not a choice, it is biological. Being raised in a gay or lesbian enviroment does not make your turn out to be gay or lesbian.

I personally support gay and lesbian marriage but I just don't think that it will pass, especially with GWB pushing to amend the constitution when he hasn't even added vital amendments such as the Womens Right's Act. I don't think that 90% of gay couples really want to get married, they just want the same benefits that normal married couples get such as hospital visitation and various tax breaks.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
Homosexuality is not a choice, it is biological.

What proof can you cite for us?