How long can we keep gay marriage illegal?

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Not allowing gay marriage IS bigoted.
"You can't let gays use the word 'marriage!' That's OUR word!"
Civil unions for ALL, or for none. Then the whole issue of who's allowed to use the word "marriage" will be left up to the churches.

I'm all for allowing gay marriage. I personally see no reason why it shouldn't be allowed. But let's no go overboard in an attempt to malign those with opposing beliefs.

Being against gay marriage is not being "bigoted." Homosexuality is a sexual orientation. Then again, so is beastiality. If you support laws against beastiality, does that also make you a bigot? If "beastiality" doesn't do it for you in the analogy, substitute pedophilia or any of the other numerous sexual behaviors considered deviant and that there are laws against.

Note: The above in no way attempts to equate homosexuality with beastiality or pedophilia.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

How odd, I was using your Guide to Videocards the other day, not imagining for a moment that you are one of the 'haters'.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Since homosexuality was considered a mental illness until 1974, we've made some pretty good progress I wouldn't hold my breath though.

Just for giggles, ask your friends what % of the population they think is gay.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Since homosexuality was considered a mental illness until 1974, we've made some pretty good progress I wouldn't hold my breath though.

Just for giggles, ask your friends what % of the population they think is gay.

i agree!
but we should have an answer before asking leading questions.

i also think the whole "marriage" and "civil union" debate just helps keep the argument going longer. a simple stalling tactic because marriage, religious or no, appears to mean jackshit to about 50+% of the nation as it is, i dont see why semantics will calm some folks down.

 

[NesuD]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Carbo

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

Don't count on it. As far as I know, people in my age group (I'm 21) are more for gay marriage than against. I don't see young people becoming LESS like that. So in say 20 or 30 years, we're going to represent the vast majority of the votes...it will be legalized by then if not before.

History is not on your side, guys. Most "equal treatment for everyone" kinds of things, even if most people think they are stupid and bad at the beginning, eventually end up widely accepted as long as there is a good base to start from. We shall see, but I don't see the whole pro gay marriage movement as a flare-up in the history books, you don't tend to see a lot of those when you are talking about equal treatment.

If i were you I wouldn't count on your "Age Group" having the exact views and opinions in 30 years that they do now. Historically young people as a group have leaned heavily to liberal viewpoints but as those groups have aged their overall outlook tends to swing to a far more conservative view by the time they get to 40 something. I attribute the phenomenon to youth=lack of experience/less widom, Age=More life experiences/more aquired wisdom to base opinions and viewpoints on. Combine that with the fact that the opposition to gay marraige is fairly widespread from right to left and i honestly don't see this radical change that you are predicting.

 

[RealityTime]

Originally posted by: Shortass
Why is there a need for gay marriage? I'm by no means religious, but as I understand it it's against the Christian religion, and marriage is a Christian activity (heh, wrong word but wherever). I'm down for gay's getting the same financial deals as married couples, and if they adopt then I'm down for them getting the same aid married couples with children have... but why go against the bible and it's teachings? I don't care if you're straight or gay or whatever you call yourself, equality is nesessary, but if they get the same benefits then the term "marriage" doesn't need to be tacked onto it.

Everyone goes against the Bible's teachings in one way or another. Or do you think you are perfect ?

 

[wchou]

Originally posted by: Rage187

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

true but even marriages don't last forever, their are so many divorces theseday that no one gives a damn anymore. 9 out of 10 people I met are divorced or remarried at least once already.

 

[HalosPuma]

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

:thumbsup:

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

Because after all, they might do more damage to the institution than straight people have, right?

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Shortass
Why is there a need for gay marriage? I'm by no means religious, but as I understand it it's against the Christian religion, and marriage is a Christian activity (heh, wrong word but wherever). I'm down for gay's getting the same financial deals as married couples, and if they adopt then I'm down for them getting the same aid married couples with children have... but why go against the bible and it's teachings? I don't care if you're straight or gay or whatever you call yourself, equality is nesessary, but if they get the same benefits then the term "marriage" doesn't need to be tacked onto it.

Then here's what we should do:

1. NO government sanctioned or licensed marriages for ANYONE

2. "Marriage" exists ONLY as a church institution. As a result, DIVORCE exists only as a church institution.

3. Taxes become SOLELY individual in nature, with parents of mutual children able to split the credit 50/50.

4. NO ONE, state or federal, recognizes couple, JUST individuals. Churches alone own Marriage.


That way, the churches can do whatever the hell they want to do with marriage and the government has NO hand in it. If you're gay and want to be "Married", find yourself a church that does gay marriages. Open the competition up and let's all stand back and watch!

Jason

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: HalosPuma

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

:thumbsup:

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: classy
This is a done deal. You have like 20 states who will ratify their state constitutions and now that Bush has total and complete power, no doubt they will amend the constitution.

you need 2/3's of all states legislatures to ratify the constitution. we have 50 states, which means 33 states

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Shortass
Why is there a need for gay marriage? I'm by no means religious, but as I understand it it's against the Christian religion, and marriage is a Christian activity (heh, wrong word but wherever). I'm down for gay's getting the same financial deals as married couples, and if they adopt then I'm down for them getting the same aid married couples with children have... but why go against the bible and it's teachings? I don't care if you're straight or gay or whatever you call yourself, equality is nesessary, but if they get the same benefits then the term "marriage" doesn't need to be tacked onto it.

i feel exactly the same way. Let them have the unions, but dont call it marriage.

Then the gov't should have no part in marriage. Therefore, gay marriage would not be illegal, but would be left to churches, as marriage should be.

In the gov't's eyes, all marriages should be rendered civil unions, right?

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

Who knew there were so many bigots on this board?

Jason

 

[polm]

Originally posted by: ELP

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Shortass
Why is there a need for gay marriage? I'm by no means religious, but as I understand it it's against the Christian religion, and marriage is a Christian activity (heh, wrong word but wherever). I'm down for gay's getting the same financial deals as married couples, and if they adopt then I'm down for them getting the same aid married couples with children have... but why go against the bible and it's teachings? I don't care if you're straight or gay or whatever you call yourself, equality is nesessary, but if they get the same benefits then the term "marriage" doesn't need to be tacked onto it.

i feel exactly the same way. Let them have the unions, but dont call it marriage.

Then the gov't should have no part in marriage. Therefore, gay marriage would not be illegal, but would be left to churches, as marriage should be.

In the gov't's eyes, all marriages should be rendered civil unions, right?

exactly...where do Religious people get off thinking that they have the right to define marriage at the Constitutional level ?

The constitution should not play ANY role in sanctification of marriage. It should be left to the religous communities to decide for themselves.

The constitution should provide for equality for all under the blanket of "civil unions" . The word "Marriage" should be removed from the constitution.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: polm
exactly...where do Religious people get off thinking that they have the right to define marriage at the Constitutional level ?

The constitution should not play ANY role in sanctification of marriage. It should be left to the religous communities to decide for themselves.

The constitution should provide for equality for all under the blanket of "civil unions" . The word "Marriage" should be removed from the constitution.

I agree with you except to point out one thing: The word "Marriage" is *already* not part of the Constitution. Anywhere. At all.

Jason

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

Who knew there were so many bigots on this board?

Jason

Not supporting that issue makes you a bigot??? The gay moevement can't pull off the "you're with us or you're against us" thing - unlike the racial issue, speaking out against gay marriage will not be tabu.

Also prejudice doesn't necessarily have anythign to do with it, same for the "homophobia" cliche. I am by no means christian, but i can see where allowing gay marriage can cause problems. Marriage by definition is a religious proceeeding and as such it follows the rules of the religion - and hence the problem on hand.

I'm all for civil unions and equal rights (inheritance etc.), however that needs to steer clear of any kind of religious conotation.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

Who knew there were so many bigots on this board?

Jason

Not supporting that issue makes you a bigot??? The gay moevement can't pull off the "you're with us or you're against us" thing - unlike the racial issue, speaking out against gay marriage will not be tabu.

Also prejudice doesn't necessarily have anythign to do with it, same for the "homophobia" cliche. I am by no means christian, but i can see where allowing gay marriage can cause problems. Marriage by definition is a religious proceeeding and as such it follows the rules of the religion - and hence the problem on hand.

I'm all for civil unions and equal rights (inheritance etc.), however that needs to steer clear of any kind of religious conotation.

Your point would hold LOTS of water if the CHRISTIANS were willing to allow marriage to simply be a private, religious matter (which I agree with you: it SHOULD be). The problem here is that the Christians want to have their institution LEGALLY recognized under the law of the land, but they only want it for them. It's no different than the Slave owners who were more than happy to keep the institution of Slavery alive as long as it was the black men under the whip exclusively. If a free black man had even *tried* to keep a white man as a slave he'd have been hunted down and lynched by every racist in a thousand mile radius.

Jason

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

aidanjm

Why bump the thread? It was nearly two months old.

 

[her209]

Marraige is not a religious institution. If it were, would all Atheist be considered single?

 

[KidViciou$]

Originally posted by: Shortass
Why is there a need for gay marriage? I'm by no means religious, but as I understand it it's against the Christian religion, and marriage is a Christian activity (heh, wrong word but wherever). I'm down for gay's getting the same financial deals as married couples, and if they adopt then I'm down for them getting the same aid married couples with children have... but why go against the bible and it's teachings? I don't care if you're straight or gay or whatever you call yourself, equality is nesessary, but if they get the same benefits then the term "marriage" doesn't need to be tacked onto it.

yes, christians are the only ones who get married, having invented the practice :roll:

 

[squirrel dog]

for a long long time .

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Carbo

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

Most "equal treatment for everyone" kinds of things, even if most people think they are stupid and bad at the beginning, eventually end up widely accepted as long as there is a good base to start from.

when and where has that happened?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: wchou

Originally posted by: Rage187

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

true but even marriages don't last forever, their are so many divorces theseday that no one gives a damn anymore. 9 out of 10 people I met are divorced or remarried at least once already.

What's seems somewhat odd to me is that divorced, separated people are frequently the most vehemently opposed to legalization of marriage for same-sex couples.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: HalosPuma

Originally posted by: ntdz
hopefully forever.

:thumbsdown:

Fixed.