Why is same-sex marriage "wrong"

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Personally, I don't give a damn if two people of the same sex want to live their lives together for as long as they remain alive. That's their business, not mine.

I am however, interested in how this affects the social construct of our society.

Typically, in the past, the family unit has consisted of one father and one mother in the household when it comes to raising a family (which includes children). For the purpose of this discussion, I am choosing to ignore divorce (single parents) and remarriage (step siblings/step parents).
So, lets take homosexual marriage as a potential family unit. Two women married, or two men married and children in the family. With homosexual marriage, we are now saying that is the equivalent family unit as one mother and one father with children in a family. Please note, I am not saying that a homosexual couple (male or female) is any less capable of raising children than a heterosexual couple, just that homosexual marriage would now make them equal familial units.
If that equivalence is acknowledged, then are we not also expected to remove women from the protected class of being considered a minority? Are we not also expected to remove homosexuals, bisexuals and transgendered people from the protected class of being considered a minority? After all, we have just declared them equal when it comes to the social construct of families. What about registering for the draft, or serving in the military? Should we now require women to register for the draft? And yes, I do know that some homosexuals and some women are already asking for equal treatment in the military, but the draft is forced, not voluntary.

I think that these are blurry line that people need to consider when it comes to homosexual marriage. It is a change to our social construct that can impact our society much more than just the marriage aspect.

You’re blending and confusing a number of different, unrelated issues.

The only issue is that of same-sex couples’ equal access to the law, as mandated by the 14th Amendment.

The issue has nothing to do with ‘minority status,’ the draft or ‘protected classes’ other than same-sex couples.

I see it as equal treatment (equal to marry) requires the equal treatment in other aspects such as the draft, and removing protected status when it comes to other social issues.
I'm just saying that if we want to change social constructs it has ramifications beyond just the marriage part. Those are things we need to keep in mind.

Other ‘equal treatment’ issues are addressed on their own merits, case by case. If a given class of persons believes their rights are in jeopardy, they may file suit in Federal court seeking relief, just as those seeking equal access to marriage law did.

The Constitution doesn’t work like the Endangered Species Act, there is no ‘protected status’ to remove. A suspect class of persons must first challenge a law, amendment, or measure they believe to be offensive to the Constitution.

 

[WinterBorn]

The anus is not a sex organ.

So straight couples who have anal sex should be barred from marriage too?

 

[Buford]

Oh, gracious but you are the clueless one.

Do you believe the anus is a sex organ?

 

[Buford]

The anus is not a sex organ.

So straight couples who have anal sex should be barred from marriage too?

That's their business and not my point. My point is only a man and a woman can have sexual intercourse.

 

[Peach]

This reflects the issue at hand:


The only issue is that of same-sex couples’ equal access to the law, as mandated by the 14th Amendment.

C_Clayton_Jones.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It’s important to understand that if the states simply obeyed the Constitution, and allowed their citizens equal access to their marriage laws as the 14th Amendment requires, there would be no reason for the courts to get involved in the first place.

This is a conflict started by the states alone, they are alone responsible, a consequence of their failure to acknowledge the equal protection rights of their citizens.

 

[Buford]

This reflects the issue at hand:


The only issue is that of same-sex couples’ equal access to the law, as mandated by the 14th Amendment.

C_Clayton_Jones.

That isn't the reason for the 14th amendment.

 

[BDBoop]

See poll.

Holy matrimony is between a man and woman.

A civil union (a contract between Two adult people) is just that.

Both parties need to be of age and capable of understanding what's going on.

now for reality;

Liberals will never stop until they can force all churches to perform any kind of wedding.

We know this by looking at the history of anything they have supported.

Who says holy matrimony is between a man and a woman.

 

[BDBoop]

The anus is not a sex organ.

So straight couples who have anal sex should be barred from marriage too?

That's their business and not my point. My point is only a man and a woman can have sexual intercourse.

And they don't have to be married to do it.

So what's your point. Where did you get the impression that gays should not be allowed to marry.

 

[Buford]

See poll.

Holy matrimony is between a man and woman.

A civil union (a contract between Two adult people) is just that.

Both parties need to be of age and capable of understanding what's going on.

now for reality;

Liberals will never stop until they can force all churches to perform any kind of wedding.

We know this by looking at the history of anything they have supported.

Who says holy matrimony is between a man and a woman.

Millions and millions of civilized human beings since the dawn of history.

 

[Unkotare]

And the OCD over gay marriage continues to plague boop.

 

[BDBoop]

Oh, gracious but you are the clueless one.

Do you believe the anus is a sex organ?

I believe you are ignorant.

I believe the entire body is a sex organ.

 

[Buford]

So straight couples who have anal sex should be barred from marriage too?

That's their business and not my point. My point is only a man and a woman can have sexual intercourse.

And they don't have to be married to do it.

So what's your point. Where did you get the impression that gays should not be allowed to marry.

Gays can't have sexual intercourse. I got that impression by using my brain and God-given common sense and refusing to be influenced by communists who want to destroy the traditional family and remove God from our culture.

 

[BDBoop]

Holy matrimony is between a man and woman.

A civil union (a contract between Two adult people) is just that.

Both parties need to be of age and capable of understanding what's going on.

now for reality;

Liberals will never stop until they can force all churches to perform any kind of wedding.

We know this by looking at the history of anything they have supported.

Who says holy matrimony is between a man and a woman.

Millions and millions of civilized human beings since the dawn of history.

Based on what?

 

[BDBoop]

That's their business and not my point. My point is only a man and a woman can have sexual intercourse.

And they don't have to be married to do it.

So what's your point. Where did you get the impression that gays should not be allowed to marry.

Gays can't have sexual intercourse. I got that impression by using my brain and God-given common sense and refusing to be influenced by communists who want to destroy the traditional family and remove God from our culture.

Sexual intercourse has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

 

[alan1]

Personally, I don't give a damn if two people of the same sex want to live their lives together for as long as they remain alive. That's their business, not mine.

I am however, interested in how this affects the social construct of our society.

Typically, in the past, the family unit has consisted of one father and one mother in the household when it comes to raising a family (which includes children). For the purpose of this discussion, I am choosing to ignore divorce (single parents) and remarriage (step siblings/step parents).
So, lets take homosexual marriage as a potential family unit. Two women married, or two men married and children in the family. With homosexual marriage, we are now saying that is the equivalent family unit as one mother and one father with children in a family. Please note, I am not saying that a homosexual couple (male or female) is any less capable of raising children than a heterosexual couple, just that homosexual marriage would now make them equal familial units.
If that equivalence is acknowledged, then are we not also expected to remove women from the protected class of being considered a minority? Are we not also expected to remove homosexuals, bisexuals and transgendered people from the protected class of being considered a minority? After all, we have just declared them equal when it comes to the social construct of families. What about registering for the draft, or serving in the military? Should we now require women to register for the draft? And yes, I do know that some homosexuals and some women are already asking for equal treatment in the military, but the draft is forced, not voluntary.

I think that these are blurry line that people need to consider when it comes to homosexual marriage. It is a change to our social construct that can impact our society much more than just the marriage aspect.

You’re blending and confusing a number of different, unrelated issues.

The only issue is that of same-sex couples’ equal access to the law, as mandated by the 14th Amendment.

The issue has nothing to do with ‘minority status,’ the draft or ‘protected classes’ other than same-sex couples.

I see it as equal treatment (equal to marry) requires the equal treatment in other aspects such as the draft, and removing protected status when it comes to other social issues.
I'm just saying that if we want to change social constructs it has ramifications beyond just the marriage part. Those are things we need to keep in mind.

Other ‘equal treatment’ issues are addressed on their own merits, case by case. If a given class of persons believes their rights are in jeopardy, they may file suit in Federal court seeking relief, just as those seeking equal access to marriage law did.

The Constitution doesn’t work like the Endangered Species Act, there is no ‘protected status’ to remove. A suspect class of persons must first challenge a law, amendment, or measure they believe to be offensive to the Constitution.

You see it as me blending and/or confusing other issues.
I see it as me treating people equally regardless of the issue.
Isn't equal treatment what people want? Isn't equal treatment fair for all?
Maybe I just don't understand why some people ask for equal treatment in one area, but expect to be treated under unequal manners (to their advantage) in some other area.

 

[Buford]

Oh, gracious but you are the clueless one.

Do you believe the anus is a sex organ?

I believe you are ignorant.

I believe the entire body is a sex organ.

Really? Have you ever had a man put his penis up your right nostril?

 

[BDBoop]

Do you believe the anus is a sex organ?

I believe you are ignorant.

I believe the entire body is a sex organ.

Really? Have you ever had a man put his penis up your right nostril?

And you continue to show your ignorance.

Your sex life must be boring beyond belief.

I am of course giving you the benefit of the doubt that you have one - since apparently, by your own admission, your needle dick can fit up a nostril.

 

[Buford]

And they don't have to be married to do it.

So what's your point. Where did you get the impression that gays should not be allowed to marry.

Gays can't have sexual intercourse. I got that impression by using my brain and God-given common sense and refusing to be influenced by communists who want to destroy the traditional family and remove God from our culture.

Sexual intercourse has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

This thread is about marriage. Perhaps you're confused.

 

[Buford]

I believe you are ignorant.

I believe the entire body is a sex organ.

Really? Have you ever had a man put his penis up your right nostril?

And you continue to show your ignorance.

Your sex life must be boring beyond belief.

I am of course giving you the benefit of the doubt that you have one - since apparently, by your own admission, your needle dick can fit up a nostril.

You're the one who stated the "entire body is a sex organ". When is the last time a man put his penis into your left ear?