The looming war over gay marriage

[Nick21]

What about churches that recognize and perform same-sex marriages? Would you be ok with that?

Exactly, but this isn't about religious freedom but rather certain groups enshrining discrimination against a historically disfavored segment of the population. Either way SSM wins, because as you pointed out, some churches recognize it and want to perform it but their religious freedoms are being infringed upon.

No, I believe that the rights of gays do not outweigh the rights of others. For example, I believe in your right to be an idiot but your right to be an idiot can not interfere with my right to be intelligent.

They don't, this is about equal access to the institution of civil marriage as regulated by a secular state. The right of SSM does not impinge on anyone's right to male/female marriage.

 

[Truthmatters]

This issue will ruin the republican party if they continue to use it to divide the country.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Much like you do not get the government to deem you as black because you simply want it.. or deem you as an antelope because you feel you are one... you don't get the government to deem you as married when it is not what marriage has been recognized as... AGAIN, for you mentally inferior twits... deem everyone the same in the eyes of government with rights, under a legally binding term such as a civil union... but keep marriage as a religious thing...

Why are you so dead set on that word? Do you think God cares what word the State uses to refer to your union, or do you think He cares about whether you live according to His law? if you object to someone else's union on religious grounds, then don't marry them in your Church and let God judge them.

And if the couples are deemed equal under the law without the religious term of marriage.. what does it matter? As shown, it is nt about equal treatment, it is about an agenda

'Marriage' is not strictly a religious term and is by no means an Abrahamic term (that would be, if I recall). It is also a legal term (legal marriage) and an anthropological term (used to describes numerous forms of marriages and nions between any number of persons across societies, from monogamy to polyandry). Not does God ever say marriage is only one man and one woman, rather the laws of Moses allowed one man to have many wives and concubines.

You've no leg to stand on and I'm sick and tired of stupid fucks like you who know less about what your god commands than I do.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

To Catholic (me!!), marriage is an institution - ordained by God - as the union of one man and one women

That's cause your obvious illiteracy prevents you from reading the bible. It is a fact that every single Catholic is mentally retarded, and you are clearly no exception.

I know more about your bible than you do, so just shut your fucking mouth- you'll look like less of an idiot.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

To me, no one person or group of people is more important or 'special' than any other. You want 'marriage', you marry someone of the opposite sex. Civil partnerships, with the same rights and responsibilities as others, are fine. They work perfectly well in Europe. Just don't force the Churches to do something outside their own beliefs.

Everyone talks about 'rights', no one talks about 'responsibility'. You don't just have rights - you have responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is to recognize the rights of other people.

So, you believe in discrimination based on gender?

No, I believe that the rights of gays do not outweigh the rights of others. For example, I believe in your right to be an idiot but your right to be an idiot can not interfere with my right to be intelligent.

Once again, what about churches that recognize and perform same-sex marriages? Aren't their rights being infringed?

 

[Political Junky]

How can you vote on what rights others are allowed to have?

you mean we have the right to do whatever we want? Really?Wow!

Your reply is senseless, really.

 

[rdean]

To me, no one person or group of people is more important or 'special' than any other. You want 'marriage', you marry someone of the opposite sex. Civil partnerships, with the same rights and responsibilities as others, are fine. They work perfectly well in Europe. Just don't force the Churches to do something outside their own beliefs.

Everyone talks about 'rights', no one talks about 'responsibility'. You don't just have rights - you have responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is to recognize the rights of other people.

So, you believe in discrimination based on gender?

No, I believe that the rights of gays do not outweigh the rights of others. For example, I believe in your right to be an idiot but your right to be an idiot can not interfere with my right to be intelligent.

Sure, you have the right to be intelligent, but having that right and proving intelligence are NOT the same thing as you so ably demonstrated.

Gays, 3 to 5% of the population. The number of gays who want to get married? I suspect it's much less than half of those.

In the mean time.

Straights have a 50% divorce rate, the single greatest cause of poverty.

Poverty, the single greatest cause of criminal behaviour.

Worrying about the gays is just a dodge. A dodge of idiots who can't clean up their own house. Yet, they claim they are doing "Gawd's will".

So idiots, is raising a "criminal" also part of "Gawd's will"? ha ha ha ha

 

[Political Junky]

My only objection to The Gayly Married were the possible increses in costs for employer provided insurance benefits should teh ghey employees insist on enrolling their "wives" or "husbands" as dependents.

Now that employers will be phasing out this benefit, mine is a mute point.

Well, considering that gay people are only 3 to 5 percent of the population. And only a small percentage of them even want to get married. Any cost increase will be negligible.

What really costs money is the 50% divorce rate among heterosexuals. Divorce is the biggest reason children live in poverty. Poverty is the biggest reason behind "crime". See a connection?

And think of all the money we could bring in if we could tax all the "Swinger's Clubs" that exist in every state of the union? Add extra taxes at the swingers conventions in Las Vegas and in Florida and California. I suspect there are many more "swingers" than gays.

Yes, we should outlaw divorce.

 

[Political Junky]

No JW.. the legal aspect is about the economics...

I have no issue with anyone having a 'civil union' whether they are gay or straight. I have an issue with 'marriage'. To Catholic (me!!), marriage is an institution - ordained by God - as the union of one man and one women for the procreation of children. Simple concept. The Catholic Church cannot 'marry' same sex couples. That is not being anti-gay - it is sticking with our faith.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why gays insist I recognize their rights while they steadfastly refuse to recognize mine.

The Catholic Church prohibits divorce, but if you give a lot of money they will grant you one.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

(John 18:36) . . .Jesus answered: “My kingdom is no part of this world.”

JOHN 17:16. “They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.”


Why are Christians so worried about the State? If you think it's wrong, don't do it. If the gays are wrong, let God judge them.

 

[Misty]

How can you vote on what rights others are allowed to have?

More accurately: How can you vote on who benefits from the same rights you do?

The answer: You don't believe in equality before the law.

Everyone talks about marriage as if it is some sort of advantage. The costs of marriage as higher than the advantages of it.

 

[K9Buck]

He (or she) who is without sin (or pleasure) cast the first stone. And you had better make sure it is a big fucking rock, hit me hard, because I can chuck one mother fucker back.

 

[K9Buck]

Everyone talks about marriage as if it is some sort of advantage. The costs of marriage as higher than the advantages of it.

No kidding, eh?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Fix your tags...

 

[Qball]

One of war's truisms:
Many battles can be lost, yet a war won.

Gay Marriage is here to stay. Think of the stupid laws against it and the battles waged and then think of prohibition, racial mixing, immigrant stigma.

Allowing Gay marriages is a sign of
social maturity because in reality gay marriages threaten nothing..except maye the ass-etts of the wealthier partner.


The train has left the station: video on youtube....search Rubin Israel and .....wait......

Why must I think of other issues when we're not talking about them? People don't work that way... similar circumstances are not similar subjects. Because racial issues, gender issues, and sexual orientation issues all involve a group of people who may be in the minority, race, gender, and sexual orientation are not the same thing.

methinks I was not being clear.

gay marriage is here. people are starting to see that most of the arguments against it aren't holding up.

eventually the SCOTUS will side with gays on this issue because the American Experience is in the end about inclusion and not exclusion.

History will repeat itself. It may take time and it may go backwards before it goes forward, but the battle for equality for gays will be one with inclusion.
btw, other nations are allowing gays to serve openly in the military. gays are marrying every where. If you had told people 30 years ago that this would happen.... too funny

How aren't the arguments against gay marriage not "holding up"?

I don't know why some people say that: "if you had said x amount of years ago that -insert thing that is now accepted- was going to be accepted, people would've thought you were crazy!" As if that's supposed to scare people into jumping on the bandwagon because of how "history" may treat them. Please. That's basically how social evolution works. Opining about the way things will be (when there's no evidence of it now) isn't convincing anyone of anything.

 

[rdean]

No JW.. the legal aspect is about the economics...

I have no issue with anyone having a 'civil union' whether they are gay or straight. I have an issue with 'marriage'. To Catholic (me!!), marriage is an institution - ordained by God - as the union of one man and one women for the procreation of children. Simple concept. The Catholic Church cannot 'marry' same sex couples. That is not being anti-gay - it is sticking with our faith.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why gays insist I recognize their rights while they steadfastly refuse to recognize mine.

The Catholic Church prohibits divorce, but if you give a lot of money they will grant you one.

You get an annulment. Not the same as divorce.

 

[rdean]

No JW.. the legal aspect is about the economics...

I have no issue with anyone having a 'civil union' whether they are gay or straight. I have an issue with 'marriage'. To Catholic (me!!), marriage is an institution - ordained by God - as the union of one man and one women for the procreation of children. Simple concept. The Catholic Church cannot 'marry' same sex couples. That is not being anti-gay - it is sticking with our faith.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why gays insist I recognize their rights while they steadfastly refuse to recognize mine.

WTF? What right are you giving up? The right to tell gays they can't get married? Ha ha ha ha that's so retarded.

 

[Toro]

As a married heterosexual man, let me tell you that my marriage and whole existence is threatened if 3% of the population are allowed to marry the person they love and care about but currently are not able to do so.

First gay marriage, and before you know it, the devil will ascend and rule for 1000 years. Its a certainty.

 

[Oscar Wao]

As a married heterosexual man, let me tell you that my marriage and whole existence is threatened if 3% of the population are allowed to marry the person they love and care about but currently are not able to do so.

First gay marriage, and before you know it, the devil will ascend and rule for 1000 years. Its a certainty.

Be afraid, Toro. Be of good fear.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

So Qball is basically telling us that if he's allowed to go marry his gay lover, his marriage to his wife will be ruined?