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.
I oppose laws that define marriage, so I would oppose a law outlawing divorce. I don't think the government should have the power to tell me who I can marry or divorce. So I oppose all "gay marriage" laws since they just expand and confirm government's power over our choices. This is especially true at the federal level.
Wouldn't removing DOMA be removing a law that defines marriage in the federal level? It sounds like you are opposed to gay marriage, but at the same time opposed and agreeing with DOMA simultaneously? I'm not sure I follow this.
It seems you are confused on the meaning of majority.
The majority of Americans support same sex marriage.
The media pushes their own agenda's. Their polls are often conducted in such a way so as to ensure their opinion is supported. If you are using that data to form you opinion on people real feelings I am afraid you are deluding yourself. The fact that the support of marriage act passed in a liberal state like California is proof of that.
While the public may support equal rights for all people, they are also aware that there is a concise effort to attack the traditional family which is very troubling to them.
Same sex marriage is another attempt to denigrate the traditional family and to further the agenda of replacing parents with government control.
It is very much like the movement to equate the owning of pets to being a parent. Pet parents, same sex marriage, attacks on the bill of rights, government entitlements, and forced public education are all part of the same overall agenda.
The media pushes their own agenda's. Their polls are often conducted in such a way so as to ensure their opinion is supported. If you are using that data to form you opinion on people real feelings I am afraid you are deluding yourself. The fact that the support of marriage act passed in a liberal state like California is proof of that.
While the public may support equal rights for all people, they are also aware that there is a concise effort to attack the traditional family which is very troubling to them.
Same sex marriage is another attempt to denigrate the traditional family and to further the agenda of replacing parents with government control.
It is very much like the movement to equate the owning of pets to being a parent. Pet parents, same sex marriage, attacks on the bill of rights, government entitlements, and forced public education are all part of the same overall agenda.
All baloney, we are not trying to attack your marriages, we want the rights and protections. how simple is that? Denigrate our marriages, Ha, you do that yourselves, do not need our help there. There is no attack against marriage, there is a move for marriage equality, it does not take away your rights or stop you from marrying, it just allows us to. Prop H8 passed because the church used lies to encourage people to vote yes on it and of those that did, they represent a small portion of the voting population and that small portion does not represent the majority of the state. Besides, no ones rights should be up to a vote of the majority, NO ONES RIGHTS.
All baloney, we are not trying to attack your marriages, we want the rights and protections. how simple is that? Denigrate our marriages, Ha, you do that yourselves, do not need our help there. There is no attack against marriage, there is a move for marriage equality, it does not take away your rights or stop you from marrying, it just allows us to. Prop H8 passed because the church used lies to encourage people to vote yes on it and of those that did, they represent a small portion of the voting population and that small portion does not represent the majority of the state. Besides, no ones rights should be up to a vote of the majority, NO ONES RIGHTS.
If you gain rights then who are married people going to be able to look down upon? How is the church going to be able to convince you to pray away the gay if your marriage is recognized. This is not fair. There must be a group that can be oppressed.
All baloney, we are not trying to attack your marriages, we want the rights and protections. how simple is that? Denigrate our marriages, Ha, you do that yourselves, do not need our help there. There is no attack against marriage, there is a move for marriage equality, it does not take away your rights or stop you from marrying, it just allows us to. Prop H8 passed because the church used lies to encourage people to vote yes on it and of those that did, they represent a small portion of the voting population and that small portion does not represent the majority of the state. Besides, no ones rights should be up to a vote of the majority, NO ONES RIGHTS.
Where your argument falls apart is that it is possible to have civil unions with the same legal rights as marriage while not calling it marriage and altering a tradition that is thousands of years old.
That of course is not what you want. You want to denigrate the institution of marriage. That is your real agenda, not rights. If rights were your agenda, you would not really care what your union was labeled.
Where your argument falls apart is that it is possible to have civil unions with the same legal rights as marriage while not calling it marriage and altering a tradition that is thousands of years old.
That of course is not what you want. You want to denigrate the institution of marriage. That is your real agenda, not rights. If rights were your agenda, you would not really care what your union was labeled.
First of all, gay marriage goes back thousands of years as well.
Second, your argument is no different than the arguments used in Loving V. Virginia. Remember how that turned out?
Third, it is not possible to have civil unions with the same rights. The federal government defines marriage as an institution between a man and woman and grants benefits/rights based on that definition. The fed will grant rights to a hetero married couple from NY, but not a homo married couple from NY.
Fourth, the radical right would never let people have the same rights as them. Take a look at all the states that banned gay marriage and civil unions, all post 2000 I might add.
first of all, gay marriage goes back thousands of years as well.
Second, your argument is no different than the arguments used in loving v. Virginia. Remember how that turned out?
Third, it is not possible to have civil unions with the same rights. The federal government defines marriage as an institution between a man and woman and grants benefits/rights based on that definition. The fed will grant rights to a hetero married couple from ny, but not a homo married couple from ny.
Fourth, the radical right would never let people have the same rights as them. Take a look at all the states that banned gay marriage and civil unions, all post 2000 i might add.
Catholic countries used to ban divorce. Forcing someone to stay with another is silly.
'Marriage Equality' double speak does that mean polygamy should be legal? If I should be permitted to marry my boyfriend why not several boyfriends? Or marry several men and woman? All qualifying for benefits.
Polygamy has Absolutely Nothing to do with Marriage Equality.
Sorry--No Sale.
But I appreciate your input.
What does that have to do with "marriage equality"?
It directly addresses "The Sanctity of Marriage" that so many people (many or most of whom are divorced) keep repeating as some kind of imaginary shield to hold up to "protect" marriage.
Something that Would "protect marriage" and "the sanctity thereof, would be to make divorce illegal.
It's just a question about how serious people are about "protecting the sanctity of marriage."
I've never bought that notion, and it looks as if a lot of other people haven't, either.
Wouldn't removing DOMA be removing a law that defines marriage in the federal level? It sounds like you are opposed to gay marriage, but at the same time opposed and agreeing with DOMA simultaneously? I'm not sure I follow this.
I am opposed to SSM and plural marriage for me and my family. But I support the right of others to marry anybody and as many as they choose to marry including their dog and their tomato plants. I don't think I should tell you who to marry and neither should our government, especially at the Federal level.
Marriage should be a religious event, not a government controlled event.
So I will oppose any new laws that confirm or strengthen government control of marriage. Government sanctioned SSM is not freedom. It's still government control.
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.
