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.
Can't see why Americans should support gay marriage when most Americans don't support homosexuality in the first place.
Considering the education level of most Americans, that isn't exactly surprising. When half the country thinks Dinosaurs and man coexisted 6000 years ago, of course sexual orientation will be a misunderstood issue for most of them.
This is incorrect. Many people simply do not want marriage changed. Period. The marriage redefinitionists would be better served accepting and dealing with this on that unambiguous level rather than trying to read more into it that isn’t there and attacking, name calling, and labeling those of us in opposition to the redefinition of marriage.
Marriage has been redefined countless times. Why is a new change suddenly so offensive when people have proposed changes for thousands of years?
Right because that's what you radical leftists can force your agenda upon the rest of society. You scoff at the federal and state judiciaries when they uphold the Rule of Law, yet when you lose elections (as you're bound to on your platform), the first thing you do is run to the courts and shop it to a sympathetic judge. It's what you did with Prop 8 in California, nullifying the votes of the people. You just did in Wisconsin with the union law. It's what you people did back in 2000 when you couldn't win the election fair and square.
How ironic that you're using the election of 2000 to support your argument. It's Ted Olson who is the leading attorney in the fight to overturn Prop. 8 in California - the same Ted Olson who represented George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore in 2000. He's a true, principled conservative. I'd love to hear you try to make your argument with him. He'd verbally tear you to shreds.
Wapasha, procreating is not a requirement of marriage, never was. So the only reason for straights to oppose gay marriage is their religion, their morals, their political leaning or just to keep the rights of marriage to themselves. Gays live in committed relationships too, why should they not also get the same exact 1049 federal marriage rights as any straight person does. Why should these rights be restricted to the special marriages of straights and denied to gays and lesbians. It is not as if straights have perfect marriages and never divorce. Heck, people like you will even stop us from getting a divorce when we get married. Marriage is also not required to have children. We only want the same rights and opportunities you have, to marry the one we love and have that relationship honored and respected by the government with fair and equal taxation and inheritance laws, not a different set of laws that you straight people enact for us. That is oppression by the masses and it needs to stop.
You're right, having children is not a requisite of marriage.
However so many people seem to forget that many gay and lesbian couples are also raising children. (1 in 3 lesbian couples and 1 in 4 gay couples)
Many of the marriage benefits, protections and responsibilities involve protections for children. Why should the children of gay and lesbian parents be treated as "less than" those children of straight parents?
These anti-gay groups like NOM and FRC etc claim they are "protecting" marriage and "protecting" children with their fear-mongering, distortions of facts and misrepresentations of gay people.
This is complete BS - they aren't "protecting" anything. They are just anti-gay. They appear to be willing to go to any lengths to keep gay people and their children from having the same benefits and protections as straight people and their children - including blatant "lying for God" in their "church funded" political fear campaigns to support their prejudice.
Right, it was about a racial discrimination. Marriage redefinitionsts so badly want to play the race card with homosexual marriage but are surprised, angered and frustrated when it doesn’t fly and nobody buys it.
Actually it's groups like NOM who are playing the "race" card. They are trying to compare their fear-mongering compaigns to restrict the rights of gay people (they call it the right of the "people" to vote to "protect" marriage) with the black civil rights movement - which was about expanding and equalising rights for a minority.
Using clips of Martin Luther King Jnr in their anti-gay advertisements is sickening. MLK would turn over in his grave (according to his wife Coretta Scott King) to see his words used for restricting the civil rights of a minority.
Actually, we're fine with the comparison. It's your side that gets angered and frustrated by it.
Of course you are. It’s certainly easier to live the fairy tale fantasy that homosexuality is somehow a race rather than deal with the reality that homosexuality is instead a sexual preference with no relation or correlation to race whatsoever. This is understandable since racial issues get people all riled up whereas sexual issues, especially those involving deviant sexual inclinations like homosexuality, aren’t anywhere near as popular. Perhaps if the numbers of homosexuals were greater, say on the order of 25% or more of the population instead of the actual 3%, things might be different. But they aren’t and redefining society to fulfill selfish and unrealistic demands to try and perpetuate a delusion that they fit in or are considered “mainstreamed” is highly unlikely at best.
This is incorrect. Many people simply do not want marriage changed. Period. The marriage redefinitionists would be better served accepting and dealing with this on that unambiguous level rather than trying to read more into it that isn’t there and attacking, name calling, and labeling those of us in opposition to the redefinition of marriage.
But the problem is that marriage is a constantly evolving social structure. Marriage as we understand it today, as a concept of love and sharing, has only been around since the Victorian era.
Also, other cultures in the world today have very different understandings of marriage too. Some cultures still have pre-arranged marriages as the norm.
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.
