Why can't people just accept gay marriage and be done with it?

[Yurt]

1. you believe homosexuality is wrong because religion or god says so. fine. that is your belief and your right to believe that. however, our country is not founded upon such beliefs. marriage is a CIVIL contract in america. god has ZERO to do with marriage under american laws.

2. if not for religious views...what do you care? a marriage is a contract. take CA for example where you can divorce for any reason you want. how does allowing same sex couples to marry interfere with your marriage rights?

 

[TheOldSchool]

I wish people would let themselves think of the issue that simply... but they won't : (

Also your current signature is awesome.

 

[DiamondDave]

I can 'stand' gay people or whomever else being with whomever else they want..... I have ZERO problem with it

What I cannot stand is government dictating that people must accept the choice of another person... we discriminate against the choices of others every day, and this is NO DIFFERENT... we choose not to serve the guy without a shirt.. we make sure the foul mouthed meth head is not allowed around our children.. we make sure the end of the world zealot is not teaching lessons to our kids.. the list goes on

Get government OUT of marriage except in governmental matters like contract law, power of attorney, taxation, etc

 

[WillowTree]

1. you believe homosexuality is wrong because religion or god says so. fine. that is your belief and your right to believe that. however, our country is not founded upon such beliefs. marriage is a CIVIL contract in america. god has ZERO to do with marriage under american laws.

2. if not for religious views...what do you care? a marriage is a contract. take CA for example where you can divorce for any reason you want. how does allowing same sex couples to marry interfere with your marriage rights?

I don't know. Ask the Iman.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Q: Why don't people just accept a new definition of "apples" that now includes rocks, and be done with it?

A: Because changing the definition of "apples" to include "rocks", doesn't turn any rocks into apples. They never have been, and changing what we call them now, doesn't make any difference - they still aren't.

Same goes for same-sex "marriages" - they never have been, and changing the definition now doesn't matter - they still aren't.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Q: Why don't people just accept a new definition of "apples" that now includes rocks, and be done with it?

A: Because changing the definition of "apples" to include "rocks", doesn't turn any rocks into apples. They never have been, and changing what we call them now, doesn't make any difference - they still aren't.

Same goes for same-sex "marriages" - they never have been, and changing the definition now doesn't matter - they still aren't.

There's the answer we've all grown to know and love...

 

[Little-Acorn]

Q: Why don't people just accept a new definition of "apples" that now includes rocks, and be done with it?

A: Because changing the definition of "apples" to include "rocks", doesn't turn any rocks into apples. They never have been, and changing what we call them now, doesn't make any difference - they still aren't.

Same goes for same-sex "marriages" - they never have been, and changing the definition now doesn't matter - they still aren't.

There's the answer we've all grown to know and love...

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway, so I'll put up a silly little icon implying you're wrong without actually saying why, and hope somebody believes me instead of you.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Q: Why don't people just accept a new definition of "apples" that now includes rocks, and be done with it?

A: Because changing the definition of "apples" to include "rocks", doesn't turn any rocks into apples. They never have been, and changing what we call them now, doesn't make any difference - they still aren't.

Same goes for same-sex "marriages" - they never have been, and changing the definition now doesn't matter - they still aren't.

There's the answer we've all grown to know and love...

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway, so I'll put up a silly little icon implying you're wrong without actually saying why, and hope somebody believes me instead of you.

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

 

[DiamondDave]

There's the answer we've all grown to know and love...

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway, so I'll put up a silly little icon implying you're wrong without actually saying why, and hope somebody believes me instead of you.

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

Because there is no constitutional charge to have government involved in marriage except in governmental matters (as explained so many times before)

Is that good enough for you??

 

[Noomi]

Q: Why don't people just accept a new definition of "apples" that now includes rocks, and be done with it?

A: Because changing the definition of "apples" to include "rocks", doesn't turn any rocks into apples. They never have been, and changing what we call them now, doesn't make any difference - they still aren't.

Same goes for same-sex "marriages" - they never have been, and changing the definition now doesn't matter - they still aren't.

The definition of marriage once meant that blacks couldn't marry white - do you mean to say that the definition hasn't changed since the 50's?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There's the answer we've all grown to know and love...

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway, so I'll put up a silly little icon implying you're wrong without actually saying why, and hope somebody believes me instead of you.

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gays can have civil unions.

You want Government out of it? make all Government authority civil unions and let religions conduct marriages.

 

[TheOldSchool]

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway, so I'll put up a silly little icon implying you're wrong without actually saying why, and hope somebody believes me instead of you.

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

Because there is no constitutional charge to have government involved in marriage except in governmental matters (as explained so many times before)

Is that good enough for you??

Um... you mean taxes and benefits? Because it seems like that is something the government is charged with.

It would be better if government could only hand out civil unions. To gay AND straight couples.

Marriage, as traditionally defined, is a religious thing. If you find a religion that declares you "married" then good for you. But government should have no say in that.

 

[DiamondDave]

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

Because there is no constitutional charge to have government involved in marriage except in governmental matters (as explained so many times before)

Is that good enough for you??

Um... wrong. There are tax benefits involved in government "marriage." It would be better if government could only hand out civil unions. To gay AND straight couples.

Marriage, as traditionally defined, is a religious thing. If you find a religion that declares you "married" then good for you. But government should have no say in that.

Perhaps you should understand what it means when someone states 'except in governmental matters'

You are a dense one

And I am fine with only civil unions or family units for both gay and straight....

 

[TheOldSchool]

Because there is no constitutional charge to have government involved in marriage except in governmental matters (as explained so many times before)

Is that good enough for you??

Um... wrong. There are tax benefits involved in government "marriage." It would be better if government could only hand out civil unions. To gay AND straight couples.

Marriage, as traditionally defined, is a religious thing. If you find a religion that declares you "married" then good for you. But government should have no say in that.

Perhaps you should understand what it means when someone states 'except in governmental matters'

You are a dense one

And I am fine with only civil unions or family units for both gay and straight....

Please define "governmental matters" o enlightened one

 

[hortysir]

1. you believe homosexuality is wrong because religion or god says so. fine. that is your belief and your right to believe that. however, our country is not founded upon such beliefs. marriage is a CIVIL contract in america. god has ZERO to do with marriage under american laws.

2. if not for religious views...what do you care? a marriage is a contract. take CA for example where you can divorce for any reason you want. how does allowing same sex couples to marry interfere with your marriage rights?

"Religiously" the only problem I have with homosexuality is the sexual act.
You wanted honesty, right?

It's the "lying with another man as you would a woman" that's the 'sin'.

LOVE isn't a sin.

Marriage, by definition is the union of one man and one woman.

You can't stick an eraser on a Sharpie and call it a Pencil.

Call it "civil union" or "domestic partnership"
Either one can have all the benefits, legally, etc... as marriage.

My toe is a toe. It isn't a finger just because I want it to feel better about itself.

The word Marriage is my only concern.
Archaic? Maybe.
Old fashioned? SO what.

 

[BallsBrunswick]

TRANSLATION: I can't refute what you said, but I hate it anyway, so I'll put up a silly little icon implying you're wrong without actually saying why, and hope somebody believes me instead of you.

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gays can have civil unions.

You want Government out of it? make all Government authority civil unions and let religions conduct marriages.

You're fighting over a word, who gives a ****? Yeah let's make an entire segment of our population second class citizens. That has always worked fantastically in the past.

 

[hortysir]

What's your argument against gay people being married? Is it the bible? Because that's not the law of this land.

Is it something else? Because that argument is easily won. So once again...

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gays can have civil unions.

You want Government out of it? make all Government authority civil unions and let religions conduct marriages.

You're fighting over a word, who gives a ****? Yeah let's make an entire segment of our population second class citizens. That has always worked fantastically in the past.

Ok, lady, whatever you say

 

[Lumpy 1]

eh....

"Soon we may live in a world where the only people opposed to gay marriage will be gay people who are married." –Craig Ferguson

"In California, the ban on gay marriage passed. Gay people are furious. They stormed the State Capitol in Sacramento and caused $3 million in improvements to the city." --Craig Ferguson

 

[BallsBrunswick]

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gays can have civil unions.

You want Government out of it? make all Government authority civil unions and let religions conduct marriages.

You're fighting over a word, who gives a ****? Yeah let's make an entire segment of our population second class citizens. That has always worked fantastically in the past.

Ok, lady, whatever you say

Is that how you try to pick guys up?

 

[Seawytch]

Call it whatever the **** you want to...just make it the EXACT same for ALL non familial consenting adult couples. This "you get this but we get this" bullshit didn't fly before and it doesn't fly now.