Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 01-05-2012, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,187 posts, read 995,163 times
Reputation: 593

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
Aren't there 6 states that have civil gay marriage. Have you heard of any lawsuits against the Catholic church or other religious institution forcing them to marry a gay couple ?
I'll have to Google that, but I do seem to remember something about that. But that does make a good point.


Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-05-2012, 08:04 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,187 posts, read 995,163 times
Reputation: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sco View Post
Even if your supposed lawsuit was a valid concern (which I don't believe), why would that be a good enough reason to keep gay people from being married? People and organizations get sued all the time for valid and completely ridiculous reasons, that doesn't mean that we get to keep entire groups of people from being treated equally under the law.
As much as I hate frivolous lawsuits, I never said that was a reason to stop anyone from getting married. Actually, I have no problem whatsoever of gays getting married right now. Personally I don't understand why anyone has a problem with it. But, to end the bickering back and forth, the idea of having the government stay out of the marriage business all together could settle the issue once and for all. But I'm not so sure that it would settle it for those on the extremes of both sides.



Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 08:34 PM
 
Location: California
37,135 posts, read 42,203,740 times
Reputation: 35012
Sure a lawsuit is possible (lawyers try everything not only for their own financial gain but to force a court decision and make a name for themselves) but unless we are going to change everything about the way religion operates in this country it won't go anywhere.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:18 PM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,771,287 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyndsong71 View Post
LOL. And your utter ignorance of who I am makes me chuckle. I don't fear gays at all, LOL. But whatever. The thing that I'm concerned about is that the activists won't be satisfied with this very simple solution of the government getting out of marriages all together.

Someone else did bring up a good point, that there hasn't been lawsuits in states that already have civil unions. If this is the case then that would prove the point. However I do seem to remember something about that actually happening. I will have to Google it to be sure.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Who cares what activists may or may not do? Deal with it if and when the time comes. We don't base decisions on hypothetical possibilities years down the road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:21 PM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,771,287 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyndsong71 View Post
As much as I hate frivolous lawsuits, I never said that was a reason to stop anyone from getting married. Actually, I have no problem whatsoever of gays getting married right now. Personally I don't understand why anyone has a problem with it. But, to end the bickering back and forth, the idea of having the government stay out of the marriage business all together could settle the issue once and for all. But I'm not so sure that it would settle it for those on the extremes of both sides.



Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
While I understand why people are pushing for the government to get out of marriage, I don't see it happening. It's been that way since the 17th Century when the Puritans opposed Christianity being involved with marriage, and instead brought Common Law marriage over from England.

There are too many legal benefits associated with a marriage license at this point to rework the entire thing for the sake of a name.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:35 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 2,897,057 times
Reputation: 1174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
Who cares what activists may or may not do? Deal with it if and when the time comes. We don't base decisions on hypothetical possibilities years down the road.

Same Sex Marriage is now legal on a federal level.
Couple wants to marry in a church, but they keep getting turned out.
Legally, do they have a case? Is this a story of "oh well, either settle for courthouse or keep lookin'? or "SUE THEM FOR DISCRIMINATION".

I honestly feel like you are one of those people who would be for it, because the church is against us.. so "we have to get them back".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:40 PM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,771,287 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0tmess View Post
Same Sex Marriage is now legal on a federal level.
Couple wants to marry in a church, but they keep getting turned out.
Legally, do they have a case? Is this a story of "oh well, either settle for courthouse or keep lookin'? or "SUE THEM FOR DISCRIMINATION".

I honestly feel like you are one of those people who would be for it, because the church is against us.. so "we have to get them back".
Well, considering I'm a theist, why would I do that? I wouldn't want to get married in some backwards, bigoted congregation anyway.

And no, they would not have legal standing to sue the Church. The Church can already ban different denominations, atheists, Jews, Muslims, etc. from getting married. Why would gays be any different?

For being gay, you certainly love to make gays seem as bad as the bigoted fundie nutcases do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,643 posts, read 26,371,773 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0tmess View Post
Well..
Government really shouldn't need to hand out papers so people can be recognized. It's silly. But, if we are for it on a legal level, it needs to be handed up to the states. I don't care what it's called. As long as a civil union piece of paper IS the same thing as a marriage piece of paper .. without any loopholes.
"Sorry, we only allow married people to put their spouse on health insurance" is a good example.

With that being said, even if legal on a federal level.. the government should NOT force any church to marry a same sex couple.

Sadly, I see it coming. We'll be able to get married eventually, but we'll want more. We'll demand that the churches we belong to to marry us or ELSE.... and.. the gay couple will win...and gays will get hated more for requiring special treatment.

I predict it'll be a lesbian couple who will do it. Just for fun!


I agree that two adults should be allowed to enter into binding contracts with one another, but why should the number of participants be limited to two.

A limit of two joiners makes sense if it is a heterosexual couple since one man and one woman are all that are needed to create children, and limiting the number of spouses the parents have to one benefits the children.

Since homosexuals, in any combination, are incapable of creating children, why should we impose a limitation on them which only serves a practical function for heterosexuals?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:59 PM
 
1,770 posts, read 2,897,057 times
Reputation: 1174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
Well, considering I'm a theist, why would I do that? I wouldn't want to get married in some backwards, bigoted congregation anyway.

And no, they would not have legal standing to sue the Church. The Church can already ban different denominations, atheists, Jews, Muslims, etc. from getting married. Why would gays be any different?

For being gay, you certainly love to make gays seem as bad as the bigoted fundie nutcases do.
No, I'm just rational and I don't expect special treatment. I don't want us to become "the new blacks" where everyone is so afraid to say anything around us in fear of coming off as offensive.

You probably were even offended by that. My point proven.

Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
I agree that two adults should be allowed to enter into binding contracts with one another, but why should the number of participants be limited to two.

A limit of two joiners makes sense if it is a heterosexual couple since one man and one woman are all that are needed to create children, and limiting the number of spouses the parents have to one benefits the children.

Since homosexuals, in any combination, are incapable of creating children, why should we impose a limitation on them which only serves a practical function for heterosexuals?

How on earth is telling people how many kids they can have fair? That's.. ridiculous. If people want to be with multiple people, go right ahead. Whatever works for them. Point is.. government doesn't need to be involved in any of what you said. (Limiting kids and explaining who can be with who)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 11:18 PM
 
15,706 posts, read 11,771,287 times
Reputation: 7020
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0tmess View Post
No, I'm just rational and I don't expect special treatment. I don't want us to become "the new blacks" where everyone is so afraid to say anything around us in fear of coming off as offensive.

You probably were even offended by that. My point proven.



Yeah well I'm sensitive. I don't appreciate being called a disgusting, perverted abomination who molests children and is going to burn in Hell.

I don't expect special treatment, but I also don't like being mistreated and viewed as inferior.
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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
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