Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fantastic response. That's where the focus really needs to be, not on it being based on just the religiousness or the sexual deviation angle. We'll see how the Millenials do.
I actually owe women an apology. When I was younger, I never really believed them when they said pop-culture images sexualized young women. There was very little of any gay images in the '80s and '90s. There was divorce but it wasn't like it is now where it's no big deal. Today, the media is pushing gay culture in your face all of the time, although it's artificially inflated (trendy). Gay images sexualize men in ways that are uncomfortable, and, according to some of the other posters in this thread, SSM material is being pushed in the schools. If it's not, it eventually will be. Don't want to discriminate on the birds and the bees talk . Pop culture is a young person's medium, and changing the definition of a family will have an affect on society. It already has. It's up to you to be dismissive of it.
It's very simple. I believe marriage should be between a man and a woman. Great peoples need a common bond, and no matter your race, ethnic background or religion, that used to be marriage. The ideal of it, not always the reality. Now we're focusing on single mothers, same-sex marriages and cohabiting households. Also, this will force people who believe SSM is against their religion to participate (yes taxes) in endorsing sin. "Honor your father and mother," Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. They already tried forcing the Catholic Church into participating in same-sex adoptions, and now the Catholic Church got out of the adoption business. I don't believe SSM has any benefit and it's not the model I want for the country. The whole thing smacks of selfishness, greed, and "metooism." But we're not in high school and it will have a profound impact on the country. I don't live in a glass house, but we almost celebrate relationship breakdowns. I don't get it.
Seriously, if I hear the "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" trope one more time, I might just puke.
I love how people are so afraid and threaten by people they deal with every freaking day. Why do people think that allowing Gays to marry is going to change the world overnight? Makes no sense.
Your hairdresser will still take your appointments. Your nurse will show up to work the next to make sure you're taking your meds. The police officer will go to work and still patrol the streets. And the firemen will still go to work to fight fires and rescue people. Yup they will all still be around, even when after they're allowed to marry their same sex partners. NOTHING WILL CHANGE. LIFE WILL GO ON.
I won't continue to belabor the point, as I have stated before, marriage is not a right. It creates an issue because government is involved. Without government involvement, there is no "right." Government originally got involved to encourage people to marry and have children. If that notion has changed, and as same-sex couple cannot biologically have children, then they should get out of the business and stop social engineering people's lives. If they're out, the issue is solved. It's about legitimizing gay culture. It's also funny to me that the left-leaners are perfectly fine with banning people's right to smoke and eat what they want, but, well, Heaven forbid anyone take up the issue of SSM.
Much love, City-Data.
Its about equality plain and simple. As far the whole argument of being biologically able to have children, should we ban couples who can't have children of their own for some biological reason or another? That whole argument is absurd.
As far as the comparisons to the bans on certain foods or smoking. The food comparison I get, I don't think foods should be banned, though I agree with listing calories counts and thing of that nature. The smoking bans are a bit different, since smoking impacts the lives of those around the smoker, two gay people getting married doesn't impact any of our lives in any way, except perhaps give us more weddings to attend.
I love how people are so afraid and threaten by people they deal with every freaking day. Why do people think that allowing Gays to marry is going to change the world overnight? Makes no sense.
Your hairdresser will still take your appointments. Your nurse will show up to work the next to make sure you're taking your meds. The police officer will go to work and still patrol the streets. And the firemen will still go to work to fight fires and rescue people. Yup they will all still be around, even when after they're allowed to marry their same sex partners. NOTHING WILL CHANGE. LIFE WILL GO ON.
Relax people.
Its been legal here in NY for almost a year, can't think of a single thing that has changed.
Please. Marriage was instituted to protect property rights and has nothing to do with sexual preference. The anti gay types are a bunch of prudish busybodies that are paralyzed by the fear that somebody somewhere may be having fun with unacceptable sex.
. Same reason that rapists and child molesters are. No one really know what causes these things, right?
Rape is a crime of violence, it once carried the death penalty here.
Child molesters - well that is a mental disorder, I am no expert.
Quote:
Never seen anyone who was openly gay get bullied in person. Gays have been more or less accepted for some time. Doesn't necessarily mean people want to publicly endorse it with same-sex marriage. They didn't stop at Don't Ask Don't Tell and they won't stop at marriage.
They did here in SA, been over 7 years since full rights were obtained and the sky did not fall, there is no gay agenda in schools. The only time it is mentioned is in life sciences (social studies) where it is mentioned that some folk are attracted to the same gender and they are not to be discriminated against.
Quote:
They are pushing a lifestyle on people as if it's normal. It's not normal. It's also a political movement that doesn't just involve gays. It's fine, but they aren't like heterosexuals.
Of course they are not the same, it is not the norm to be gay and no one in their right mind would choose a "lifestyle" where there is so much stigma attached to it.
Other than the sex, they take the same risks in marriage as hetero couples do. They can divorce, split assets and all the stuff married folk take for granted.
Just as you and I cannot choose to be attracted to males, they OTOH cannot help but be attracted to the same gender. Should they be punished just because we as straights cannot understand what makes them tick?
Outside of their sexual orientation, they are just like you and I, they are human and lead pretty mundane lives like most of the other plebs in society do.
While your suggestion of getting govt out of the marriage game, that is not gonna work. At best all couplings should be reduced to a civil union/license and then whatever the religious want to do over and above that, is extra. They are not expecting the Pope to sanction their marriage nor you and I.
I won't continue to belabor the point, as I have stated before, marriage is not a right. It creates an issue because government is involved. Without government involvement, there is no "right." Government originally got involved to encourage people to marry and have children. If that notion has changed, and as same-sex couple cannot biologically have children, then they should get out of the business and stop social engineering people's lives. If they're out, the issue is solved. It's about legitimizing gay culture. It's also funny to me that the left-leaners are perfectly fine with banning people's right to smoke and eat what they want, but, well, Heaven forbid anyone take up the issue of SSM.
Much love, City-Data.
I didn't ask you if marriage was a right. I asked about equal protection under the law.
Heteros aren't going to give up the benefits and protections of legal marriage, so saying "get Gov out of marriage" is a non-starter, IMO.
The children angle is also a non-starter, unless you propose to not grant rights and benefits to hetero couples, like my wife and I, that can't or won't have children.
I'm left-leaning on social topics, and I fully support smoking bans in public places, because that negatively impacts more than just the people choosing to smoke. Bans on eating what you want? No way.
Well, because children have no business having sex with grown adults. But consenting adults have adult genitalia and adult bodies and are responsible for themselves.
I won't continue to belabor the point, as I have stated before, marriage is not a right. It creates an issue because government is involved. Without government involvement, there is no "right." Government originally got involved to encourage people to marry and have children. If that notion has changed, and as same-sex couple cannot biologically have children, then they should get out of the business and stop social engineering people's lives. If they're out, the issue is solved. It's about legitimizing gay culture. It's also funny to me that the left-leaners are perfectly fine with banning people's right to smoke and eat what they want, but, well, Heaven forbid anyone take up the issue of SSM.
Much love, City-Data.
Speaking of raising children:
According to the 2000 census:
45.6 percent of married heterosexual partners were raising children
43.1 percent of unmarried heterosexual partners were raising children
34.3 percent of lesbian couples were raising children
22.3 percent of male gay couples were raising children
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Pop culture is a young person's medium, and changing the definition of a family will have an affect on society. It already has. It's up to you to be dismissive of it.
