Opposition to Gay Marriage - Any Basis Other Than Intolerance and Bigotry?

[kaz]

It is the demands of spoiled people throwing a tantrum to get what they "want", no matter what the cost is for others.

It's not just "no matter" the cost, she admitted it's her goal. She can't feel equality without the money, money, money, give her the money. Then she'll feel equal.

Why did you get legally married?

I've answered this several times

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Gays have it so bad in this country. It boggles my mind that they havnt moved to the middle east yet to escape the persecution in this country.

 

[Seawytch]

And yet you are legally married aren't you? So will you be honest and admit you are a ******* hypocrite?

We want to get married for the EXACT SAME reasons STR8TS do...period.

The same reasons?

I said I wanted to get my wife past her parents, but I oppose government marriage having any effect on anything else. I oppose the death tax for all, I oppose having different tax treatments.

You said you wanted gay marriage to stick your hand in other people's wallets.

In what possible way are those the same?

But I do like the hypocrisy attack. Which I handed to you and you think was clever. I pay income tax and oppose income taxes, I pay corporate tax (I own two businesses) and pay corporate taxes, I pay unemployment tax and oppose government unemployment insurance. The list goes on. So seriously, your argument is I recognize the reality of what I have to do because of government? I would only be a hypocrite if I actually wanted things that government marriage offers and chose it, I don't.

You are blessed, no one is going to demand you get a government marriage. I am telling you to kiss the sky and thank your lucky stars. Exactly how is that "hypocrisy?"

Nothing stopping you from a divorce is there? You take advantage of all the benefits of legal marriage, but don't want them for other people?


You can oppose them until the cows come home, but they aren't going away. Since that is the case, there is no compelling state reason to prevent gays and lesbians from those same rights, benefits and privileges.

 

[mattskramer]

It's not just "no matter" the cost, she admitted it's her goal. She can't feel equality without the money, money, money, give her the money. Then she'll feel equal.

Why did you get legally married?

I've answered this several times

It is the same for gays and straights. If it is for money then it is for money - taxes, etc.
For straights and gays: You don't have to be married to live together. You don't have to be married to have a child (surrogate mother or sperm bank will do if you are gay). You don't have to have a child to be married.

It is all the same.

 

[Seawytch]

Wanna compare kids? I'll win...

What is your standard for "winning" since you know nothing about my kids?

Don't have to know yours, I know mine.

 

[brono921]

What the **** are you talking about?
Evolution. Does that confuse you?
I'm talking about using science to create our families, just like heterosexuals do. You know...artificial insemination, surrogacy, etc?
And that was able to propogate a recessive gene that science tells us would have rendered itself extinct, thousands of years ago?
LMAO!!!!!

Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is claiming a "gay gene"
...wait for it......wait for it.......
but scientist all pretty much universally agree that being gay isn't a choice and that there IS a genetic predisposition for sexual orientation
BINGO!!!!!
Such a gene would have found itself on an evolutionary cul-de-sac.
And you thought you knew shit about science?

 

[logical4u]

Where is it written that marriage is a "right"? It is not a "right" (otherwise people could be forced into marriage to fullfill another's "right"). Marriage is the partnership between one man and at least one woman. The definition has stood for centuries. There is no reason to twist, mock, confuse that word. Do those that want a homosexual partner legally reject the ability for themselves to have a 'raditional' marriage? If not, his is special treatment (an additional privilege for people of a sexual preference is not equality).

You are sitting at a ******* computer. Is it really so hard to do a little research before typing? The SCOTUS has determined, on no less than three occasions, that marriage is a fundamental right so that's "where it is written" that marriage is a right.

You are also, obviously, another one that needs to read up on the history of marriage.

Are "fundemental" rights different than "civil" rights? Are homosexual prohibited from entering into traditional marriage? If not, they have the "same" rights as all other citizens.

What is a raditional marriage?

From the conversations that I have had about this topic, the main reason "homosexuals" want to be defined as "married" is to have access to gov't monies that belong to their partner. If this is true, this country is broke and cannot afford that "drain" on the taxpayer dime. The reason the gov't started giving money to widows was because the husband 'was' the sole money maker, and the wife was left with no form of income. Homosexuals have no reason to not to be 'productive members of society', they cannot procreate without 'influences from outside the partnership'. If they choose to have children, they must rely on persons of the opposite sex to assist them in this matter.

No, we want to get legally married for the exact same reasons that heterosexuals get legally married. There is no difference in the "reasons" that we want to marry our partners...none at all. Are you legally married? If you are, why did you get legally married?

If you wanted to get married for the same reasons that heterosexuals get married that would be to form a partnership with the opposite sex, and Lord willing, have children from that specific union (part hers, part his). You do not want to get married for the same reasons. Your (poor) imitation of a real marriage is a mockery of "traditional marriage".

Are you really trying to argue that gays shouldn't be allowed marriage equality because then their partners would get survivor benefits? Why should heterosexuals be allowed these benefits and not gays and lesbians? You are advocating blatant discrimination.

Because it is not a partnership based on having children. Traditionally, the woman sacrificed her career (not always, and the woman still reduces her career in most cases to be the primary care giver for children). Since homosexuals cannot procreate with their partner, that is unecessary, each should be a productive adult in society.

So what if gays and lesbians need "assistance" from members of the opposite sex to start their families. What does that have to do with whether or not we should have marriage equality. Should sterile couples not be allowed to marry in your twisted world?

If you wanted to get married for the same reasons that heterosexuals get married that would be to form a partnership with the opposite sex, and Lord willing, have children from that specific union (part hers, part his). You do not want to get married for the same reasons. Your (poor) imitation of a real marriage is a mockery of "traditional marriage".

Homosexuals should not be able to "marry" for those reasons. If they want to make a new category of legal definition, possibly, common law partner or bound partner, I have no objections. If they want to make a "special" legal joiner that all taxpayers will be forced to support thru the gov't, then it should be put on a ballot.

Sorry, but civil rights should not be voted on. If we had voted, say, on interracial marriage...do you know when it would have passed? It wouldn't have been in 1967 when Loving v Virginia was ruled on. If we had voted on interracial marriage, it would not have enjoyed majority support until the 1990s. Bigots should NEVER be allowed to vote their bigotry into law.

Okay, is a "fundemental" or "civil" right? In my opinion, it is neither, if you need another person to make it happen, it cannot be a "right". Is there a law prohibiting homosexuals from entering into "traditional marriage"? If not, homosexuals are being treated just like all of those heterosexuals.
Interracial marriage is still one woman, one man (and I thought you people were "into" science).

Should bigots (homosexual marriage extremists) be able to force laws on the citizens that is destructive to society?

 

[kaz]

And yet you are legally married aren't you? So will you be honest and admit you are a ******* hypocrite?

We want to get married for the EXACT SAME reasons STR8TS do...period.

The same reasons?

I said I wanted to get my wife past her parents, but I oppose government marriage having any effect on anything else. I oppose the death tax for all, I oppose having different tax treatments.

You said you wanted gay marriage to stick your hand in other people's wallets.

In what possible way are those the same?

But I do like the hypocrisy attack. Which I handed to you and you think was clever. I pay income tax and oppose income taxes, I pay corporate tax (I own two businesses) and pay corporate taxes, I pay unemployment tax and oppose government unemployment insurance. The list goes on. So seriously, your argument is I recognize the reality of what I have to do because of government? I would only be a hypocrite if I actually wanted things that government marriage offers and chose it, I don't.

You are blessed, no one is going to demand you get a government marriage. I am telling you to kiss the sky and thank your lucky stars. Exactly how is that "hypocrisy?"

Nothing stopping you from a divorce is there? You take advantage of all the benefits of legal marriage, but don't want them for other people?


You can oppose them until the cows come home, but they aren't going away. Since that is the case, there is no compelling state reason to prevent gays and lesbians from those same rights, benefits and privileges.

Your argument is a non-sequitor from the points I made. I am arguing against government having marriage and I said that it's not what gives my marriage meaning. My getting divorced to demonstrate that doesn't accomplish my goals. It's just an arbitrary task you are assigning me to achieve your objectives.

My wife also doesn't agree with me, she wants a government marriage. I don't get to pick that on my own. You are obviously unaware that marriage is not two individuals, you can't make unilateral choices. Makes me wonder despite 5 kids if you are in a committed relationship at all since you know nothing about them.

 

[mattskramer]

Gays have it so bad in this country. It boggles my mind that they havnt moved to the middle east yet to escape the persecution in this country.

Oh strawman...people have it good it this country. That doesn't mean that it can't be made even better.

 

[kaz]

Wanna compare kids? I'll win...

What is your standard for "winning" since you know nothing about my kids?

Don't have to know yours, I know mine.

You didn't say you have great kids, which I have no reason to doubt. You said they are better then mine. That is the standard which I asked you for, how are your kids better then mine since if we compare them you "win?"

 

[kaz]

Gays have it so bad in this country. It boggles my mind that they havnt moved to the middle east yet to escape the persecution in this country.

Oh strawman...people have it good it this country. That doesn't mean that it can't be made even better.

That would be a far more effective argument then the one that is being made

 

[logical4u]

Another reason: HEALTH, we all need to make sacrifices to bring down the health costs for the nation and since homosexual behavior (in men) can increase the chances they will get AIDS or HIV, why encourage that type of behavior by legallizing (endorsing) that behavior that will lead to increased health costs for all of us? (They did it for 'smoking', they are doing it for transfats, they are doing it to children's menus in schools) Do youu believe the Czar over the health care plan will not throw you over a cliff (or give you "the" pill) once your health care costs become 'greater than average'?

Health reasons are exactly why you should be in support of marriage equality. Let's start with the fact that marriage promotes monogamy. What is a surefire way to decrease STDs? Why to promote monogamy of course.

Another reason is that marriage makes people healthier. That's right...

The Case for Marriage ~ Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better off Financially

Married Folks Still the Healthiest

So if health (and not bigotry) were TRULY your concern, you'd be supporting marriage equality.

"Homosexual unions" are legal in some states. Please provide the evidence that these states STDs have been reduced. It should be obvious stats, especially since some states have made "homosexual unions" legal years ago.

You have "marriage equality. What you want is additional "perks" for being homosexual. There is not a single law that prevents a "homosexual" from entering a "traditional marriage".

 

[mattskramer]

It is so parallel:

Church marriage for gays and/or civil unions for gays and/or cohabitation for gays.

Church marriage for straights and/or civil unions for straights and/or cohabitation for straights.

 

[Seawytch]

The same reasons?

I said I wanted to get my wife past her parents, but I oppose government marriage having any effect on anything else. I oppose the death tax for all, I oppose having different tax treatments.

You said you wanted gay marriage to stick your hand in other people's wallets.

In what possible way are those the same?

But I do like the hypocrisy attack. Which I handed to you and you think was clever. I pay income tax and oppose income taxes, I pay corporate tax (I own two businesses) and pay corporate taxes, I pay unemployment tax and oppose government unemployment insurance. The list goes on. So seriously, your argument is I recognize the reality of what I have to do because of government? I would only be a hypocrite if I actually wanted things that government marriage offers and chose it, I don't.

You are blessed, no one is going to demand you get a government marriage. I am telling you to kiss the sky and thank your lucky stars. Exactly how is that "hypocrisy?"

Nothing stopping you from a divorce is there? You take advantage of all the benefits of legal marriage, but don't want them for other people?


You can oppose them until the cows come home, but they aren't going away. Since that is the case, there is no compelling state reason to prevent gays and lesbians from those same rights, benefits and privileges.

Your argument is a non-sequitor from the points I made. I am arguing against government having marriage and I said that it's not what gives my marriage meaning. My getting divorced to demonstrate that doesn't accomplish my goals. It's just an arbitrary task you are assigning me to achieve your objectives.

My wife also doesn't agree with me, she wants a government marriage. I don't get to pick that on my own. You are obviously unaware that marriage is not two individuals, you can't make unilateral choices. Makes me wonder despite 5 kids if you are in a committed relationship at all since you know nothing about them.

What I see is you taking advantage of all the benefits of legal marriage and yet not wanting anyone else to have those advantages. I don't know what they call that where you come from but where I come from it smacks of hypocrisy.

I have been committed to the same individual for 15 years...without those benefits that you wallow in (while decrying them at the same time). Go ahead and try and school me some more about committed relationships though...it's pretty funny.

 

[logical4u]

There are all kinds of psychologists.....but 99% of them are of the liberal mindset....so i don't really trust what that Lamb guy testified...

Children can be adaptable as they have no choice....however it has been proven time and again that children raised typically without their fathers have many problems.....you don't think kids raised by two queers don't have their problems too....? get real...

...but of course the idea is to solve that dilemma thru the eddycashun system...

You seem to be misinformed. Studies of children raised in single parent homes show that those children have more problems that children raised with two loving parents. The gender of those parents IS irrelevant.

Studies of children raised in loving gay and lesbian homes show that their children are at no disadvantage to those raised by heterosexuals. So, to break it down into really simple language that even an inbred southerner would understand...kids raised by two queers don't have any more problems than kids raised by breeders.

Lets interview the adult children raised by "homosexual couples" and hear what they have to say.

 

[Seawytch]

What the **** are you talking about?
Evolution. Does that confuse you?
I'm talking about using science to create our families, just like heterosexuals do. You know...artificial insemination, surrogacy, etc?
And that was able to propogate a recessive gene that science tells us would have rendered itself extinct, thousands of years ago?
LMAO!!!!!

Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is claiming a "gay gene"
...wait for it......wait for it.......
but scientist all pretty much universally agree that being gay isn't a choice and that there IS a genetic predisposition for sexual orientation
BINGO!!!!!
Such a gene would have found itself on an evolutionary cul-de-sac.
And you thought you knew shit about science?

You ignored the link didn't you? Understanding Genetics

 

[kaz]

What I see is you taking advantage of all the benefits of legal marriage and yet not wanting anyone else to have those advantages. I don't know what they call that where you come from but where I come from it smacks of hypocrisy.

If I don't want to extend the current definition of marriage because I want to roll it back, then I am a hypocrite. Just the way liberals argue.

I have been committed to the same individual for 15 years...without those benefits that you wallow in (while decrying them at the same time). Go ahead and try and school me some more about committed relationships though...it's pretty funny.

Here's what I said the first time:

My ass is white and my wife is Korean. I've got a government marriage because that was the only way I was getting her past her parents out of her house, but the fact that government recognizes our marriage doesn't give it any meaning to me, our relationship gives it meaning. We've been married 22 years and it's not changing, but that has nothing to do with government

I said I got married because of my partner. You demand I ignore her over my political ideology. Hmm...my partner's wishes, my politics. That's how you treat your partner? Or is it just what you assign to me?

Specifically, you never, ever would contradict your political ideology when it came in conflict with your partner's desires. You practice that. Please.

 

[logical4u]

No, you are. People aren't comparing "plights", but discrimination and that, sir, is exactly the same.

I'm sorry, apparently I missed all the signs...

Gays sit at the back of the bus?
Gays have different drinking fountains?
Gays not allowed to vote?
Gays hanged on a regular basis?
Gays voices not allowed to publicly be heard?
Gays property rights in question?

I believe your so called discrimination pale's by any standard. In no way is this comparable to what blacks were subjected too.

If gays and lesbians did not have the ability to hide their orientation, all of those things would have been attempted, and you know it.

Compare the current fight for marriage equality to the fight for interracial marriage and the parallels are stunning. There's even a test you can take...

Marriage Quiz

Hmmm, are you saying that homosexual are deceitful? And you want to legalize an "honor ceremony" (marriage)?

 

[logical4u]

Compare the current fight for marriage equality to the fight for interracial marriage and the parallels are stunning. There's even a test you can take...

Marriage Quiz

My ass is white and my wife is Korean. I've got a government marriage because that was the only way I was getting her past her parents out of her house, but the fact that government recognizes our marriage doesn't give it any meaning to me, our relationship gives it meaning. We've been married 22 years and it's not changing, but that has nothing to do with government.

Congrats, it looks like you are in it for the long run!

 

[brono921]

You ignored the link didn't you?
Let's see just how "groundbreaking" your link is.........

[So the interplay of environment and genes probably results in homosexuality.]
Ooooh, now that's conclusive. And monkeys will probably fly out of your ass, and I'll probably hit the lottery, and today Jesus will probably return.
That kind of "hard evidence" sends shivers down one's spine, doesn't it?
Let's just cut to the chase.
All mammals reproduce to pass down genetic code. They also do it for recreation. After all, if the act of sex was painful, very few would do it.
So that being said, an organism that copulates with another organism strictly for pleasure without any results of procreation, dies as a species.
See Charles Darwin as a reference.
Next.