Minneapolis - The New Gay! (rapes, deal, catholics)

[DirtMagurt]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

I'm trying, but -- and I'm serious here -- could you please elaborate on why this amendment is needed? What are the non-religious reasons why one would be opposed to the idea of gay marriage? (I know that's a slightly different question than opposition to the amendment itself)

(And as an aside, it's not really a religious issue, anyway; the most active people I've met on this topic (in opposition to the amendment) have been pastors and active church members. There certainly is no one "religious" stance on this.)

It's been covered about forty times in this thread...this is intended to preclude legislation from the bench. And it makes a lot of sense, regardless of whether or not you support gay marriage (I do, incidentally).

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by xandrex

I think you misunderstand me. I was not suggesting that your viewpoints were rooted in religion. I was using my own personal experiences with people who hold the same viewpoint as you (in regards to the marriage amendment) to illustrate why I believe it is not as simple as painting the pro-gay-marriage side as not understanding your viewpoints. I most certainly do. I just happen to disagree.

I apologize if I gave offense. After having been here for several days on this (don't ask me why.. I ask myself) i began to see the sides of the issue on this thread as me and one other guy against everyone else. I have tried to make my position as clear as I possibly can above.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

I apologize if I gave offense. After having been here for several days on this (don't ask me why.. I ask myself) i began to see the sides of the issue on this thread as me and one other guy against everyone else. I have tried to make my position as clear as I possibly can above.

I wasn't offended.

I think the problem is that the argument is generally used by conservative Christians who are imposing it because of religious belief. You have said that religion is not your rationale for choosing the viewpoint, which is acceptable, but not the norm. The anti-gay-marriage crowd are almost entirely using religion in some way, shape, or form, some likely think you're simply hiding your religious beliefs (not saying I agree with that, but it's certainly plausible for people to think that).

I certainly disagree with banning it as none of the arguments I've heard have satisfied me. Maybe there are people like you who have found a rationale not based on religious belief for not supporting gay marriage. I disagree, but only respectfully.

[DirtMagurt]

Originally Posted by xandrex

I think the problem is that the argument is generally used by conservative Christians who are imposing it because of religious belief. You have said that religion is not your rationale for choosing the viewpoint, which is acceptable, but not the norm. The anti-gay-marriage crowd are almost entirely using religion in some way, shape, or form, some likely think you're simply hiding your religious beliefs (not saying I agree with that, but it's certainly plausible for people to think that).

I certainly disagree with banning it as none of the arguments I've heard have satisfied me. Maybe there are people like you who have found a rationale not based on religious belief for not supporting gay marriage. I disagree, but only respectfully.

This hearkens back to the argument earlier in the thread that all laws are essentially an enforcement of moral code in one form or another, regardless of which side is doing the imposing. In a representative republic, those laws are obviously arrived at with some moral majority, or they wouldn't pass.

Anyway, you're not "banning" or "not supporting" anything because that privilege never existed previously. At most you are preventing it. Let's at least be honest about what these changes would entail.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by xandrex

I wasn't offended.

I think the problem is that the argument is generally used by conservative Christians who are imposing it because of religious belief. You have said that religion is not your rationale for choosing the viewpoint, which is acceptable, but not the norm. The anti-gay-marriage crowd are almost entirely using religion in some way, shape, or form, some likely think you're simply hiding your religious beliefs (not saying I agree with that, but it's certainly plausible for people to think that).

I certainly disagree with banning it as none of the arguments I've heard have satisfied me. Maybe there are people like you who have found a rationale not based on religious belief for not supporting gay marriage. I disagree, but only respectfully.

I don't know why people would be confused on my stand on homosexuality. I gave it four days ago (can it really have been that long?) in this thread:

" I wouldn't advocate gay relationships or gay parenting, but I generally don't have a quarrel with people who choose them for themselves. Some of the better parents I know are gay couples but state sanctioned marriage is not necessary for them to live together or have children."
[+] Rate this post positively
Last edited by Glenfield; 05-12-2011 at 04:30 PM..

[DirtMagurt]

That sounds almost libertarian. No offense of course.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by DirtMagurt

That sounds almost libertarian. No offense of course.

No offense taken.

[xandrex]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

I don't know why people would be confused on my stand on homosexuality. I gave it four days ago (can it really have been that long?) in this thread:

" I wouldn't advocate gay relationships or gay parenting, but I generally don't have a quarrel with people who choose them for themselves. Some of the better parents I know are gay couples but state sanctioned marriage is not necessary for them to live together or have children."
[+] Rate this post positively
Last edited by Glenfield; 05-12-2011 at 04:30 PM..

I think people might understand what your platform for homosexuality is, but they may not understand what played a role in forming that opinion. For instance, as you are obviously aware, some people are opposed to gay marriage because they believe God sees it as an abomination. That is their rationale for their behavior towards homosexuals and gay marriage. Your rationale behind why you believe what you believe is what I was indicating might trip people up - not your actual stand on the issue.

[DirtMagurt]

whoops, double post

[DirtMagurt]

Originally Posted by xandrex

I think people might understand what your platform for homosexuality is, but they may not understand what played a role in forming that opinion. For instance, as you are obviously aware, some people are opposed to gay marriage because they believe God sees it as an abomination. That is their rationale for their behavior towards homosexuals and gay marriage. Your rationale behind why you believe what you believe is what I was indicating might trip people up - not your actual stand on the issue.

I think people might not understand that the points Glenfield and SS are trying to drive home don't have anything to do with religion per se, and that it's absurd to assume such a thing. Which you obviously have no problem with, but many apparently do.