It has nothing to do with supporting the gay lifestyle. I can only speak for myself, but I think most of those opposed to such an amendment would feel the same way regardless of the minority it affects.
It has nothing to do with supporting the gay lifestyle. I can only speak for myself, but I think most of those opposed to such an amendment would feel the same way regardless of the minority it affects.
I don't want gay marriage in our constituiton. It shouldn't have to be addressed in that document.
I personally don't want to have gays marry, and all the legel benefits that come with marriage.
Why? Society does not benefit from thier marriages. They can not procreate on thier own.
So they must adopt a child or deviate from thier lifestyle for a time until a child can be created.
Either way I don't believe it's a healthy way to raise childern. I'm sure the child can cope with the issues of such a family.
But why should the child have to. I am sure life will find a way to adapt but maybe I won't try to.
I just don't like the gay lifestyle and won't allow them to gain more credability.
Its like a retarded person whos defect is just big enough to allow him to function but not be accepted into general society.
Why? It's natrual to reject individuals who have lost abilities that the general society has.
The retarded/gay have lost abilities that the general society has and they are rejected for being a lesser human, a step behind evolution, the remainder of a complete human.
BUt this is just my opinion and the way I'll vote according to my beliefs.
Is there any benefit to a gay marriage, with respect to society?
I personally don't want to have gays marry, and all the legel benefits that come with marriage.
Why? Society does not benefit from thier marriages. They can not procreate on thier own.
So they must adopt a child or deviate from thier lifestyle for a time until a child can be created.
Either way I don't believe it's a healthy way to raise childern. I'm sure the child can cope with the issues of such a family.
But why should the child have to. I am sure life will find a way to adapt but maybe I won't try to.
I just don't like the gay lifestyle and won't allow them to gain more credability.
Its like a retarded person whos defect is just big enough to allow him to function but not be accepted into general society.
Why? It's natrual to reject individuals who have lost abilities that the general society has.
The retarded/gay have lost abilities that the general society has and they are rejected for being a lesser human, a step behind evolution, the remainder of a complete human.
BUt this is just my opinion and the way I'll vote according to my beliefs.
Is there any benefit to a gay marriage, with respect to society?
YES
I want an amendment to ban all marriage from government purview; only "communal property" contracts should exist, only able to enter into one of them, only when at age of contractual consent, allowing any number of them. The stated should never ask about sexual activity or housing situations when doing this.
I want an amendment to ban all marriage from government purview; only "communal property" contracts should exist, only able to enter into one of them, only when at age of contractual consent, allowing any number of them. The stated should never ask about sexual activity or housing situations when doing this.
I've seen some cluebags, but you take the cake today.
Lawful procreation? So having children without being married is illegal?
Marriage is as much a financial institution as it is a religious or social one.
Recognition of the covenant between a man a woman and God to spend the rest of their life as one flesh.
An amendment to the U.S. Constitution to ban same sex marriages is a betrayal of the principles annunciated in that historic monument to the freedom and equality of all of its citizens.
Or, to put it in simpler terms, if a couple of same sex committed lovers isn't imposing their lifestyle on you or your children, or forcing into your house of worship, why should you give a damn if they wants to share the same legal civil benefits society bestows on other loving, committed couples? :Q
YOUR religion, and YOUR moral beliefs have nothing to do with it. Anyone who would do so is a freaking pea brained, bigoted moron who doesn't deserve the rights they enjoy under our Constitution that they would deny to other peaceful citizens. :disgust:
Or, to put it another way, if you would deny these people their rights, it may be just a matter of time until YOUR group becomes the next target. Then, we'll see how strong you feel about protecting the civil rights of others.
Or, to put it in simpler terms, if a couple of same sex committed lovers isn't imposing their lifestyle on you or your children, or forcing into your house of worship, why should you give a damn if they wants to share the same legal civil benefits society bestows on other loving, committed couples? :Q
YOUR religion, and YOUR moral beliefs have nothing to do with it. Anyone who would do so is a freaking pea brained, bigoted moron who doesn't deserve the rights they enjoy under our Constitution that they would deny to other peaceful citizens. :disgust:
Or, to put it another way, if you would deny these people their rights, it may be just a matter of time until YOUR group becomes the next target. Then, we'll see how strong you feel about protecting the civil rights of others.
To even think about bringing it up to that level just goes to show what an utter tool Bush really is.
"Marriage" is the ceremonial aspect that recognizes the covenant between a man a woman and God.
The covenant between a man a woman and God is not created when the justice of the peace says "you are now married" nor when the priest says "i now pronounce you man and wife" nor with breaking glass, nor any other religious thing people do.
But even without that ceremony you could honestly say 'i am married' if you are referring to the spiritual covenant between yourself someone of another sex and God.
I'm against misinforming people in regards to what marriage is, so i belive in removing the right to say someone is 'married' from the state. I'm also for removing the legal recognition of a marriage from the sate. In seeing that we still need communal property for all sorts of reasons *even non-sexual ones* i think we should allow communal property contracts between any number of people of any sex, but none of those should be able to be in more than one contract.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
The Religious aspect of it should not even be considered when debating the legality of same sex Marriages. It depends on the laws of the state where that precedure takes place. Right now it is against the law in California so any Marriages between same sex couples there are invalid. If the law was to be changed it sahould be up to the citizens of that state, not the Courts and definately not the Federal Government, especially if their decision is based on religion.
All i can say is that God came in the form of Christ to die for you, accept Jesus as lord of your life and you won't have to deal with these sins that have you slave any longer.
The fact is that we recognize it because of the spiritual covenant between a woman a man and God.
It's a lie to tell people who go against this definition that they can be married, it's not a possibility.
so i suggest that we stop the gov from telling anyone they are married, communal property contracts should be the only thing recognized by the state, and they should have nothing to do with number of people or sex of those people.
edit:
Of course if 2 homosexuals, or 4 Mormons, or even a sheep and a man want to say they are married that's none of the governments business.
God-bless you.
You don't have to take a test for a marriage license, though. A marriage license is so the gov't can keep tabs on who is married and who isn't...and collect a few $$ in the process.
In Texas we've got to take a blood test to assure that they aren't related and to assure that the child isn't going to die in-womb because of in-compatible blood types. The license is restricted based on other marriages one might have as well; some states also require pre-marriage counseling.
I don't feel the government has any say in how adult couples choose to live. Marriage is an institution of religion. Couples that live together, whether hetero or homo should be afforded the same rights and priveleges.
I do not support a constitutional amendment to ban gay unions.
I do not support a constitutional amendment to ban gay unions.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter