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.
Elizabeth Taylor is possibly getting married for a 9th time....
Jesse James and Tiger Woods are screwing EVERYTHING.....
Yet, the idea of same-sex marriage is what is going to destroy the institution of marriage?
The same marriages that are being performed by the priests that are also inappropriately touching and molesting your children? REALLY?!?
Can't take credit for this one. Someone else said this and I loved it!
I think marriage like many thing is a FAIRY TALE!!!
If you can be with someone and love them and if you want to involve GOD that is up to the couple. In the end only you make the choice to agree to work out your differences, build a life, have children if you want to and have a working relationship.
Society is not ready to accept gay people and that is what "protecting marriage" is about. It's not about if you have a right too or not, people want to protect the value of what marriage is in their idea of it. If someone is getting married everyone assumes today it is to the OPPOSITE SEX in general conversation. I dont think people want to or nor face it would be a homosexual marriage or even having to ask the question. People are not ready to accept gay people in the normal conversations, nor do people understand gay relationships. Gay people dont have normal conversations with straight people at work or even with strangers due to the possible closet choices. Straight people have their own ideas of what gay people are like. I think we as a nation accept the individuals but we dont want to acknowledge the relationships and communities as "normal"
That is the issue, some of it is religious idealogy and some people just dont get it and dont care to know about it.
Gay people are not interested in marriage they are looking for society to accept them as a equal, social and as a couple. They want to not be afraid at work to say they are getting married and tell everyone. They want the excitement and normal responses straight people get as though being love is the same and find the right person for the rest of your life.
While I can understand that America and its society can not mentally deal with that. It is not that they hate you and I'm sure some groups of people might be generally people can not relate on a sexual and emotional level.
Gay marriage is not about marriage.. its about acceptance and that is about it. While gay people want to say its not, can you think of something more important on life decisions and events in everyday life of love that the word MARRIAGE would come up.
Marriage is a building block and a general conversation... it contains family functions and FAMILY TREES. It is a family event, you request time off from work for vacation to honeymoon. It is not just marriage it is social acceptance and nothing more. Gay people and the agenda is to push society closer from the closet to the public and from public to normal as the color of your eyes. People currently do not see no matter what law is passed as gay being normal and that is what its all about.
PS this is not my view of gay people or marriage just make idea on the difference and the true situtation.
Would there be a difference therefore in kind or by defintion if the marriage was made between a man and a woman who were not able to produce children either by reason of fertility on either partners part or choice not to have progeny?
That doesn't change the core of the definition though as it "normally" was and is used as such. The fact that a couple may through medical reasons or like manners not have children, does not invalidate its definition. In normal occurrence they can due to their "relationship". There have even been cases of couples who had a medical condition to which stated they were incapable of having children, but through some abnormal occurrence, they did end up conceiving.
A homosexual couple can never achieve this "between them". That is, it isn't an issue that there coupling may have a "chance" of such or that by some abnormality they could conceive. It is simply a physical impossibility, obviously so.
Also, there is the issue that while they (heterosexual couple) may not be able to achieve such through traditional means, they certainly can achieve such through medical means such as fertilization of the females eggs with the husbands sperm in a controlled environment to which is brought to term through a surrogate.
In the end, the fact of lines joining, coming together, becoming one, is still established between the key parties.
The point is not that they may not, or can not through traditional means, but rather it is possible of such, however slight. So, in those cases if the lines are not created, the contract still serves its purpose even though a line was not created.
Since the homosexual couple can never achieve this between them, marriage isn't a proper term to fit their coupling. A civil recognition is more appropriate in this circumstance and leaves no illusion or confusion between the establishment of the coupling.
So the production of progeny is not the one characteristic which is central to the definition of marriage, but lines joining, coming together, becoming one is ?......in the historical definitions? Put more simply what are the key characteristics which define marriage, as it would appear that producing progeny is not.
So the production of progeny is not the one characteristic which is central to the definition of marriage, but lines joining, coming together, becoming one is ?......in the historical definitions? Put more simply what are the key characteristics which define marriage, as it would appear that producing progeny is not.
Progeny is the joining of lines, coming together, becoming one. It is the essential core to the definition, the very historical reasoning for its purpose. kings married off their children to their neighboring countries to create claims of right between families. Many clans of old married between them to unite under one banner (a child of both is the result of both merging).
Many of these marriages throughout history, through many different cultures were not even ones designed out of love, out of anything to which would be described today as "reasons for marrying". It was done to secure lines, property, rights, etc... and this was only achieved by uniting the bloodlines which would give them hold between them. You know the saying "blood is thicker than water" and similar references. Blood has always been considered above that of normal agreement, it was the bond between many societies throughout history.
It also was the reason for some failing lines. Some marriages failed to produce anything and in some cultures it was considered an insult to which all agreements that would be established by such a line joining (tribes, kingdoms, clans, etc...) would be null and void.
I honestly do no think anyone did. I think it was merely an acknowledgment of the condition to which family lines were created and due to the nature of those lines, societies as they developed a structure of laws acknowledged the results of such coupling. The "ceremony" itself in terms of its relevance is different in many cultures and has many different processes and reasoning for its structure. All center around the concept of creating lines though. Legal adaption over history was simply more detailed clarifications to fit the advancement of those societies structures.
Its not marriage. Homosexuals do not create bloodlines, they do not create a family tree. They can never do such, ever. This is the definition of marriage, not love. Many marriages were arranged with disregard for love.
None of your points mean anything in terms of my argument. /shrug
That's extremely ignorant. Blood line? lol! What about all the married couples who choose not to have children? Who can't have children? Or what about me? I'm gay, and I have a partner and two children. Both our names are together on both our children's birth certificates, so yes, we have a family tree. Love to, but apparently you don't understand what love has to do with relationships.
That's extremely ignorant. Blood line? lol! What about all the married couples who choose not to have children? Who can't have children? Or what about me? I'm gay, and I have a partner and two children. Both our names are together on both our children's birth certificates, so yes, we have a family tree. Love to, but apparently you don't understand what love has to do with relationships.
I don't know, how about try reading the thread first before you come in with "I gotcha!" arguments that have already been discussed?
Or, waltz in like an idiot and start yammering away. Your choice.
I think marriage like many thing is a FAIRY TALE!!!
If you can be with someone and love them and if you want to involve GOD that is up to the couple. In the end only you make the choice to agree to work out your differences, build a life, have children if you want to and have a working relationship.
Society is not ready to accept gay people and that is what "protecting marriage" is about. It's not about if you have a right too or not, people want to protect the value of what marriage is in their idea of it. If someone is getting married everyone assumes today it is to the OPPOSITE SEX in general conversation. I dont think people want to or nor face it would be a homosexual marriage or even having to ask the question. People are not ready to accept gay people in the normal conversations, nor do people understand gay relationships. Gay people dont have normal conversations with straight people at work or even with strangers due to the possible closet choices. Straight people have their own ideas of what gay people are like. I think we as a nation accept the individuals but we dont want to acknowledge the relationships and communities as "normal"
That is the issue, some of it is religious idealogy and some people just dont get it and dont care to know about it.
Gay people are not interested in marriage they are looking for society to accept them as a equal, social and as a couple. They want to not be afraid at work to say they are getting married and tell everyone. They want the excitement and normal responses straight people get as though being love is the same and find the right person for the rest of your life.
While I can understand that America and its society can not mentally deal with that. It is not that they hate you and I'm sure some groups of people might be generally people can not relate on a sexual and emotional level.
Gay marriage is not about marriage.. its about acceptance and that is about it. While gay people want to say its not, can you think of something more important on life decisions and events in everyday life of love that the word MARRIAGE would come up.
Marriage is a building block and a general conversation... it contains family functions and FAMILY TREES. It is a family event, you request time off from work for vacation to honeymoon. It is not just marriage it is social acceptance and nothing more. Gay people and the agenda is to push society closer from the closet to the public and from public to normal as the color of your eyes. People currently do not see no matter what law is passed as gay being normal and that is what its all about.
PS this is not my view of gay people or marriage just make idea on the difference and the true situtation.
So you feel that society dislikes gay people and is bigoted toward them, so we should just shut up and go back into hiding? lol!
Luckily, the society I live in is quite accepting of me. Society's opinion of gay people is changing as old people die off. 20 years from now, a vast majority of Americans will be fine with gay marriage.
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.
