Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-17-2012, 08:45 AM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,974 posts, read 65,292,087 times
Reputation: 15075

Advertisements

For 1,900 years, Christian scholars didn’t know that Jesus’ teachings were based on a well-established group of commandments that didn’t include the prohibition on homosexuality.
This article explains why and difference between justices and jobs => Jesus on Homosexuality




Why would we reserve "special" words in our civil, secular laws for heterosexual couples that homosexuals couples are not entitled to be associated with? That just enshrines the notion of inequality in the law. And why stop at the gay/straight distinction? Why not "civil shacking ups" for atheist couples, "civil cohabitations" for black couples, "civil mixings" for interracial and interfaith couples, etc (I've never really understood why it's so offensive to many religious people for gays to be associate with the word "marriage," even in a civil, secular context, but it's perfectly fine for atheists to be associated with the word "marriage" in a civil context).


When the SCOTUS rules on this amendment it will show how it violates 14th amendment.

Take a look a the 14th Amendment.
It says:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

It doesn't say:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, except when the law uses an emotionally charged word precious to a majority subset of Americans. In that case, the law can be specially reserved for that subset at the exclusion of other groups of Americans, although if you feel up to it you can write an identical yet differently titled law for the excluded subgroup so they can have equal rights while still allowing the majority subset to feel superior."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2012, 09:31 AM
 
5,265 posts, read 16,543,105 times
Reputation: 4325
Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
This response lacks logic. Our goal should be to retain the good and eliminate the wrong in society. Every generation has its popular errors. Once it was slavery, then communism, now hostility to families.
What are you even talking about with this. Nobody can seem to provide a straightforward answer as to how on earth allowing gays to marry or have civil unions actually affects theirs or anyone else's heterosexual marriage? The only way I can see that being the case is if any of the following are true..

1. There is some sort of quota/limit on marriages in each state. Like, they will only allow a certain number of people to be married every year, and if the gays start "taking all the spots", there will be less opportunity for straight couples to tie the knot

2. When gays marry, they will come to your house and harass you for not being like they are. They will now say that your marriage is "abnormal" because it isn't like theirs and you will be made to feel illegitimate because others think that your relationship is less valid than theirs.

Otherwise, call me shortsighted...but I really can't see how respecting differences and allowing gays to legally recognize their relationship somehow "takes away" from heterosexual marriage. Marriage is a relationship between two people....it is different for everybody. The argument that it "weakens the institution" is pretty pathetic. If you feel that your marriage or anyone else's is threatened by allowing homosexuals to have the same benefits, that speaks more to issues within your own relationship with your spouse than to "the institution".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 09:47 AM
 
2,668 posts, read 7,128,512 times
Reputation: 3570
^ Apparently the homophobes believe that, since we've outlawed gay marriage, all gay people will suddenly turn straight, get married, and raise happy little Christian families, just like Ward and June Cleaver. Wouldn't that be swell?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 09:59 AM
 
Location: Homeless
17,720 posts, read 13,434,045 times
Reputation: 11992
Quote:
Originally Posted by arbyunc View Post
^ Apparently the homophobes believe that, since we've outlawed gay marriage, all gay people will suddenly turn straight, get married, and raise happy little Christian families, just like Ward and June Cleaver. Wouldn't that be swell?



Shoot me now sounds boring as hell.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 10:08 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
13,966 posts, read 24,031,540 times
Reputation: 14760
Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
This response lacks logic. Our goal should be to retain the good and eliminate the wrong in society. Every generation has its popular errors. Once it was slavery, then communism, now hostility to families.
That is EXACTLY what equality is all about. It is wrong for a civil society based on the concept that "all men are created equal" to make some of its citizens less than fully equal based on either religious interpretation or tyranny of the majority.

For me, being American is an "all in"or "all out" proposition. You either believe in our system or you don't. I, for one, believe in it and its march toward full equality of its citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 10:11 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
13,966 posts, read 24,031,540 times
Reputation: 14760
Here's a litmus test for those who think being gay is choice...

Would you encourage your daughter to marry a so called reformed gay man?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Ayrsley
4,713 posts, read 9,662,114 times
Reputation: 3824
Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
The United States was founded as a Christian nation. The founding documents of this country are loaded with references to Christiantiy and God. But that is not the topic of this thread.


Agreed that this is getting off topic and is an entire discussion in and of itself. Although religion is going to always be a part of this discussion when there are people who state that the only reason they support something like Amendment 1 is because, “god says so,” at least according to their personal, religious beliefs / dogma / mythology. But then again, even the argument that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation holds little weight. I mean, one could also say that the U.S. was founded by slave owners who wanted to be free. This country (and the entire world for that matter) has changed a lot since the 1700’s – we no longer have slavery. Women have rights and privileges that they did not have when this country was first founded. One cannot just reach back 200+ years back to the Founding Fathers and ignore everything that has changed since then; when a lot of our country’s laws, and attitudes have not remained static since that time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
Reasonable people could accept the possibility that the other side had a principle involved in a debate, even if they disagreed with the principle. If you oppose the amendment, you will never understand the opposing side by accusing them of hatred without considering whether they might have higher principles involved in their stand.


It is less a matter of accepting that the “opposing side” has “principles” involved than it is the fact that their principles result in the passage of laws which effectively relegate a certain segment of society to a position of being second-class citizens simply because of something that should not even be an issue in the first place, namely their sexual orientation. So while certain people may have principles, when they seem suspect or misguided to begin with – yes, that makes people angry. Just because one has “principles” does not automatically give them a higher standing (moral or otherwise).

There was a time when interracial marriage was prohibited in the state of NC. In fact, this state’s constitution was actually amended in 1875 to include the statement that, “all marriages between a white person and a Negro or between a white person and a person of Negro descent to the third generation inclusive are, hereby, forever prohibited,” (a statement which remained in NC’s state constitution until 1971). I am sure there were people who supported that amendment at that time who also had principles, such as that allowing such marriages would dilute white families and bloodlines and somehow damage our society.. That would be their “higher principle,” on the matter. Someone today may still hold such a principle – well and good for them; that doesn’t make them any less of a racist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
We, on the pro traditional marriage side have stated numerous times why we oppose redefining marriage.


And 95% of the time those statements reflect the basic fact that they simply think homosexuality is wrong, or “icky”, or because such behavior conflicts with their personal (sometimes religiously-based) thoughts on homosexuality. It has yet to be stated by anyone how allowing homosexual couples to marry would in any way either erode their personal beliefs, or have any effect on their own marriages and how they choose to raise their family – other than a few, illogical ramblings about how all of a sudden their children or other people’s children might suddenly turn gay and run out and marry a member of the same gender.

In fact – I will pose this question to you: If homosexual couples were given the right to marry: how would that directly affect your personal life and that of your family? If you can provide a rational response to that question, I would be more than glad to hear it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
Man + woman + children is necessary for any society to have a future.


Actually, all that is necessary for the future is that next generation of the society. Whether those children are raised by a heterosexual couple, a homosexual couple, or even a single parent or (what the heck) by the “village” of some hippie commune is secondary. That a child’s parents are a heterosexual couple does not automatically somehow make them better parents.

The argument that same-sex couples cannot procreate does not hold water here either. There are many heterosexual couples that are biologically unable to have children as well. Some heterosexual couples choose not to have children at all, but that does not mean that they do not contribute to the welfare and development of other children, be they nieces, nephews or even other children within the community, either directly or indirectly.

Heck, if the argument is that people who do not get married and have children are contributing to the downfall of our society, then this means that a lot of Catholic priests who don’t marry and have kids are part of the problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
For the same reasons I do not support divorce of convenience, heterosexual promiscuity, or other unhealthy relationships.


And that is your right to do so, although you have not defined what constitutes an “unhealthy relationship.” That aside – if a couple has a divorce of convenience, if one or more heterosexual people engage in promiscuous behaviors...how does that directly affect you and your family? Does the fact that complete strangers may engage in activities that you, personally, do not agree with, somehow have a negative effect on your family and your marriage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
Why look at the failed relationships to set the guidelines?


Well if you are talking about failed marriages, then you cannot use that to support a ban on same-sex marriages. Because any negative fallout from failed marriages up to this point can be blamed 100% on "traditional" marriages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
In reality, our society has been saying for 50 years that one more exception won't make a difference. A few more traditional values overturned won't cause our society's downfall.


Just because something is based in tradition does not always mean that it is somehow better.


Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto View Post
But the reality is that our birth rate is now below replacement, children are being raised by television, and our nation is plunged in debt that it will never be able to repay.


Again, if you are talking about the breakdown of the family and its effects on our society, there are only heterosexual individuals to blame for that because they are the only people who have been allowed to marry and legally raise a family up until this point. To follow your logic, you could argue that it’s the heterosexuals that are destroying marriage in this country, not the gay members of our society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 01:15 PM
 
Location: North Carolina
2,657 posts, read 8,009,371 times
Reputation: 4361
Quote:
Originally Posted by VA palmetto
This response lacks logic. Our goal should be to retain the good and eliminate the wrong in society. Every generation has its popular errors. Once it was slavery, then communism, now hostility to families.
And I guess you and your fellow believers have designated yourselves as the arbiters of what is "wrong" and should be eliminated.

As far as "hostility to families", look at these pictures
The Gay Families Project / GayFamiliesToday.com // A photobook project by Stefan Jora
and tell me how those family configurations are a threat to your self-righteous brood.

*shudders* This is getting to be more and more loathsome. It would be a scary world if people like you stalked the landscape with the authority to decide who is good and who is bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Homeless
17,720 posts, read 13,434,045 times
Reputation: 11992
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverwing View Post
And I guess you and your fellow believers have designated yourselves as the arbiters of what is "wrong" and should be eliminated.

Haven't you heard? Gay people are just wrong
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2012, 05:08 PM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,164 posts, read 27,111,629 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverwing View Post
And I guess you and your fellow believers have designated yourselves as the arbiters of what is "wrong" and should be eliminated.

As far as "hostility to families", look at these pictures
The Gay Families Project / GayFamiliesToday.com // A photobook project by Stefan Jora
and tell me how those family configurations are a threat to your self-righteous brood.

*shudders* This is getting to be more and more loathsome. It would be a scary world if people like you stalked the landscape with the authority to decide who is good and who is bad.
lol! "Hostility to families"

I'm a gay parent who lives with my partner of 16 years and our two children. We go to PTA meetings, mow the lawn, prepare meals, attend church, go to soccer practice, clean house, do laundry, go on vacation... yeah, we're quite the threat to families!

Oh well, I'm headed to NC for the first time next week on business. I hear it's beautiful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top