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.
If you need permission (license) it is not a right.
There are no "equal rights" involved in licensed marriage.
Coincidentally, common law marriage does not need license.
But there is no such thing as a homosexual common law marriage.
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a marriage contract is for the merger of property rights for the benefit of progeny of said marriage. Homosexual marriages do not gene splice children as yet. But when they do, certainly it would be beneficial to marry.
For people who cry and whine about Conservatives pushing their morals on everyone, they sure seem to delight in pushing their Liberal values on other people.
Allowing other people to have the same rights you have doesn't force anything on you.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,454,406 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by victimofGM
To read some posters here you'd think the entire south all think and act the same. Alabama did something and all I see is "the south".
Oh, puleeeze, not the tired old "they're not representative" argument…?!!
NYTimes: States Renew Fight to Stop Same-Sex Marriage
Republican state legislators in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas have introduced bills this year that would prohibit state or local government employees from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples, despite federal court rulings.
The clash of religious principle with the rulings of the federal courts is perhaps most evident in North Carolina, where at least six magistrate judges, who are called upon to perform civil marriages, quit their jobs after a federal judge approved same-sex marriage there in October.
If you need permission (license) it is not a right.
There are no "equal rights" involved in licensed marriage.
Coincidentally, common law marriage does not need license.
But there is no such thing as a homosexual common law marriage.
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a marriage contract is for the merger or property rights for the benefit of progeny of said marriage. Homosexual marriages do not gene splice children as yet. But when they do, certainly it would be beneficial to marry.
Neither do people who get married in their 50ss either . That argument has been brought up and shot down time and time again.
If you need permission (license) it is not a right.
There are no "equal rights" involved in licensed marriage.
Coincidentally, common law marriage does not need license.
But there is no such thing as a homosexual common law marriage.
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a marriage contract is for the merger of property rights for the benefit of progeny of said marriage. Homosexual marriages do not gene splice children as yet. But when they do, certainly it would be beneficial to marry.
Homosexuals do have children by using the same methods that millions of heterosexuals use.
Does the South always have to be the last area of the country to achieve social progress and be forced by the federal government to adapt these changes despite the opposition from its conservative politicians. From integration to education to gay rights it always seems like the South lags far behind the rest of the country. Will it always be this way or will the federal government always have to drag it kicking and screaming into the modern era?
And for those who say I don't understand the South I lived in North Carolina from age 6 to age 26.
My father was a NY metro public school teacher and his school had open racial violence between students as late as 1976(!) when he last worked in that field.
The liberals' constant garbage about the racism and backwardness in the South is a clear indication of how ignorant they truly are. They style themselves as intellectually and morally superior, but in reality are shallow and narrow minded people who simply parrot politically correct rhetoric. People who actually live in the South see blacks and whites and straights and gays living and working together daily. The leftists want to pretend it is still 1964 in Mississippi and Georgia. It lets them puff themselves up with how enlightened and progressive they are and look down their noses at all the rednecks. The truth is that nobody wears white robes anymore, nobody's being lynched, and nobody is forced to go to church. People in the South have cellphones and running water and all their front teeth. The leftist view of the South is nothing but them advertising the exact type of bigotry that they claim they crusade against.
Well said!!! The ignorance of some on these boards is stunning to say the least.
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that a marriage contract is for the merger of property rights for the benefit of progeny of said marriage. Homosexual marriages do not gene splice children as yet. But when they do, certainly it would be beneficial to marry.
Ahem. Homosexuals have always had children. Homosexual couples, like heterosexual couples, have children that they individually bring to their relationships. Using your criterion, it is none too soon for marriage to be extended to them.
Or are you saying that marriage should only be extended to couples whose children are genetically related to both of them? Keep in mind that if you restrict marriage to couples with genetically blended children, you're going to invalidate a *whole bunch* of heterosexual marriages.
no. Refusal to give your citizens the access to rights enjoyed by every other resident in your state makes YOU the bigot. People in the south have very many fine qualities, but fall short when it comes to recognizing that all americans should share in the same rights and freedoms.
Left leaning person here (Fox News basher).
I disagree. The South had some issues, and has some, as does any place. For instance, you can say that we were last to integrate, but in 2015 I say that race relations are better here, and more open. Go up north and there is MUCH MORE latent racism. Heck, in 1999 I broke down in New Hampshire, and was taken aback at the racism, the use of the N-word, and what not while my car was fixed. They were buddying up to me because they knew I was from the South, but it was aweful.
People up North are (IMO) much more racists. It doesn't show as much because many places outside the big cities are still unintegrated.
If I were a mix-race couple in a small town, I'd MUCH RATHER be in the South.
If I were Gay in a small town, I'd MUCH RATHER be in the South
I might say that 2015 Republicans need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Modern Age, but that is more of a philisophical comment, not geographical. (And I realize it is only my opinion, many will not agree.)
Just admit it conservatives, you completely lost this issue. The sooner we get past it, the sooner the people forget about it.
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.
. That argument has been brought up and shot down time and time again.