First black tea baggers, now gay tea baggers, somewhere a liberals head is exploding

[Darwin333]

I'm all in favor of government getting out of the marriage business and issuing only civil unions, leaving marriage to the churches (several of which have no problem marrying gays.) What I DON'T want is civil unions for gays and marriage for normals, creating two separate bodies of law that will inevitably begin diverging. I really, really want this debate to be over, and separate but equal just means the battle goes on.

This.

Civil unions for all in the eyes of the government. If you want some other title then go to your church and obtain it but in the eyes of the government you and your spouse have entered into a civil union, regardless of gay or straight.

This is such an easy friggen solution. The religious nuts still get to keep the "sanctity of marriage" and everyone enjoys equal rights from the government. Done deal, whats the next issue?

BTW, anyone who brings pedophilia or marrying animals or any other absurd argument into a discussion involving two consenting adults is an idiot.

 

[classy]

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.co...o-come-out-as-conservative-than-as-gay-video/


What surprised me most about this is that I actually agree with their stance on gay marriage, and I totally thought I wouldn't. Their idea that everyone has civil unions, gay or straight, and then what you call marriage is between you and your church, that government has no involvement in your marriage reflects my ideals.

Oh how sweet.................

 

[werepossum]

This.

Civil unions for all in the eyes of the government. If you want some other title then go to your church and obtain it but in the eyes of the government you and your spouse have entered into a civil union, regardless of gay or straight.

This is such an easy friggen solution. The religious nuts still get to keep the "sanctity of marriage" and everyone enjoys equal rights from the government. Done deal, whats the next issue?

BTW, anyone who brings pedophilia or marrying animals or any other absurd argument into a discussion involving two consenting adults is an idiot.

Plus those who reject gay marriage on religious grounds would reject churches that would marry gays anyway, so they are still happy thinking that only they have "real marriage" in the eyes of G-d. You're right, this is such an easy solution, so much so that there is almost no chance of it ever being enacted. Unless someone is clever enough to write it up in a 2,000 page bill with no name - or perhaps call it the "Defense of Marriage Act" - and load it up with the usual pork and privileges. Then our Congresscritters might actually pass it by mistake, since we know they don't actually read bills longer than "Air is good, m'kay?" before voting them into law. If they can pass a bill without even noticing that it has no title, surely someone could slip this in and get this shit over and done.

Hat tip to dammitgibs for bringing this to our attention.

 

[Hacp]

The government most certainly has a vested interest in marriages, especially between a man and a woman. It promoted family building and reproduction. All needed for a healthy society.

Look at Japan and the steps that government is taking to try and promote its population to breed with eachother and not tentacles.

I'll gladly breed with the Japanese. Multiple times. In a day. I'll even pay for the plane ticket.

 

[MJinZ]

Instead, in the eyes of the government, you would be as "civil unioned" as any bible thumper with archaic beliefs and traditions. Whats the problem again?

The problem is social psyche involving "marriage" is important apparently.

Well, I guess that's obvious or we wouldn't be having retards raising $40 million dollars to fight gay marriage.

 

[sportage]

Lets just change the name of marriage to claptoogoofunk.
Then no one would have a problem with same sex claptoogoofunk.

 

[WHAMPOM]

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.co...o-come-out-as-conservative-than-as-gay-video/


What surprised me most about this is that I actually agree with their stance on gay marriage, and I totally thought I wouldn't. Their idea that everyone has civil unions, gay or straight, and then what you call marriage is between you and your church, that government has no involvement in your marriage reflects my ideals.

Somehow you thought this was news to someone besides yourself??

 

[dmcowen674]

If the goal of marriage is reproductive, should post-menopausal women be allowed to marry? If it's family building without reproduction, then why do you care if it's same or opposite genders?

Carousel is the answer

 

[dmcowen674]

I'll gladly breed with the Japanese. Multiple times. In a day. I'll even pay for the plane ticket.

Oh damn, first time agreeing with this one

 

[peonyu]

If a gay couple absolutely want to be married in a Church go to Key west, they do exist. Im not a fan of it, and dont know how the Priest/Pastor interprets the marriage as being ok in his religion, but whatever.

But there is some gay acceptance amongst Christians atleast...I dont know how a gay Muslim would hold up in comparison. I bet if one asked they're Imam if he would marry him and his man he would get beatdown or worse. So there are worse things out there than Christians.