Do you believe in same-sex marriage?

[Meister]

I came into this thread hoping for things to be different than the usual Gay Marriage thread at USMB. As usual however, I was disappointed.

Lifes tough, Dog

 

[dilloduck]

I came into this thread hoping for things to be different than the usual Gay Marriage thread at USMB. As usual however, I was disappointed.

He who expects nothing, has all things.

 

[Modbert]

Lifes tough, Dog

Sure is. But there is obviously a solution that both sides should logically be able to agree on. However, the arguing goes on.

 

[dilloduck]

Lifes tough, Dog

Sure is. But there is obviously a solution that both sides should logically be able to agree on. However, the arguing goes on.

I've solved it several times but nobody listens to me.

 

[Modbert]

I've solved it several times but nobody listens to me.

Not as fun if everyone can get along I suppose the thinking is.

 

[Political Junky]

I voted "yes" in the sense that it is a phenomenon known to have occured.

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

I have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

 

[Modbert]

i have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

 

[Meister]

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

I have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

And I believe that most men would like it behind closed doors. Most men aren't exhibitionists....just sayin

 

[Ragnar]

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

I have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

Not if they are sober and out of puberty.

 

[Harry Dresden]

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

I have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

ok if you say so....i dont know many "hetero" men who would parade around dressed like Richard Simmons OR would "love" it if other guys were doing it....you live in a strange place Junkie....

 

[Rambunctious]

I've been married for a while now and I love my wife very much but my advise to gay people is STAY SINGLE are you kidding me. You have it made, you can shack up put forth a civil union and if you get sick of each other walla off you go. I'm kidding just a bit, I understand love and commitment but freedom is not over rated.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I voted "yes" in the sense that it is a phenomenon known to have occured.

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

This is actually a subject of great debate in the homosexual and BDSM communities. Many people in both believe - mistakenly, I personally think - that the way to "normalize" their lifestyles in the minds of the mainstream is to be shocking and in-your-face over and over until people become desensitized. My feeling is that just because people become used to seeing the circus coming to town doesn't mean they think clown suits are normal attire.

Unfortunately, there simply is no way to stop the ones who are the adult equivalents of rebellious teenagers being a huge social burden on the family's Thanksgiving dinner just because they can.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

I have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

I doubt it. Ever been to the Folsom Street Fair? They have heterosexuals engaging in essentially the same behavior, and it's about as distasteful to the average middle-class American.

The truth is that most people just don't want to be made an unwilling participant in someone else's sex life. It's called a "private life" for a reason, so keep it that way!

 

[Ragnar]

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

I have a feeling many hetero men would love the same behavior if it were heterosexuals doing it.

I doubt it. Ever been to the Folsom Street Fair? They have heterosexuals engaging in essentially the same behavior, and it's about as distasteful to the average middle-class American.

The truth is that most people just don't want to be made an unwilling participant in someone else's sex life. It's called a "private life" for a reason, so keep it that way!

Heh.

Maybe there should be two parades per year. Have the err traditional(?) "Gay Pride Parade" every year on whatever date they have been doing it, and then 6 months later every actual participant in the Gay Pride Parade should have to stand on the sidelines and watch the "Proud Parents of Gay Children Parade" while the biological parents act in the same manner as the kids in the earlier gig.

Wow now that I've typed that and drunk edited it I have to say, it was WAY more funny in my head.

 

[Conspiracist]

I voted "yes" in the sense that it is a phenomenon known to have occured.

As Terry Pratchett says, "Just because they exist is no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages them."

In LA, they have, or had a Gay Pride Parade every year. I gotta tell you that gives gays a bad name. I have no issues with gays overall, but the parade could have tried to have a little class to promote itself, and not come across the way it did. It was so in your face that it came across as disgusting.

Yah, that kinda "sucks" hehe knee slapper there... Seriously if they just stuck with frilly floats and showed that they donate to good causes and such they would take their cause much further.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Current vote 21 no 13 yes. SO I would say the yes are failing on here as WELL as in every vote ever allowed about it, by the people.

 

[AllieBaba]

Oh fiddlesticks. The "marriage" they're talking about requires a re-definition of the term, and the desire to make it legal isn't so they can obtain rights (there are civil contracts BESIDES the marriage contract that can secure property rights between couples of any gender). Legalizing marriage in the legal system is just code for getting a foot into those churches who currently don't perform marriages between gay folk.

And you're right...the government has absolutely no place in the churches. So no, the state has no right to force the hand of the church.

you can't possibly be serious.

Sad to say, but Alliebaabaa is perfectly serious. I wonder if she can provide us with the churches that have been forced to perform interracial marriages since Loving v Virginia. But then again, she probably won't.

I wonder if you can provide me with the quote where I said churches had been forced to perform interracial marriages.

In other words, what the fuck are you blabbing about? Because it certainly has nothing to do with anything I've said.

 

[mudwhistle]

I go with my stock answer.

I believe gays should be able to experience the same pain and suffering that heteros suffer from with a long drawn out and inopportune marriage.

The only difference is they can't be force into shot-gun weddings.

 

[dilloduck]

I go with my stock answer.

I believe gays should be able to experience the same pain and suffering that heteros suffer from with a long drawn out and inopportune marriage.

The only difference is they can't be force into shot-gun weddings.

Actually I'm starting to think some gays want to get "married" so they can legally lay claim to thier lover.

 

[asaratis]

I voted "yes" in the sense that it is a phenomenon known to have occured.

That's not the question.

DO YOU BELIEVE IN>>>>>SAME_SEX MARRIAGE? Certainly, some have existed. The question is whether they should exist under the definition of "married couple"?

Lifes tough, Dog

Sure is. But there is obviously a solution that both sides should logically be able to agree on. However, the arguing goes on.

This is not a question with a wide choice of possible solutions. It is a yes/no question. There is no middle ground or third choice that might be suitable to both sides.

Either the word "marriage" gets redefined or it does not. It puzzles me why even when offered ALL of the benefits and privileges given married couples, same-sex couples are still not satisfied. There's this lingering desire for forced legitimacy and acceptance of homosexuality as an intent of nature rather than man.