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.
Are generally (but not always) net takers from the public trough. (ie, they pay less in taxes than they receive in benefits).
Take jobs that would otherwise be available to legitimate citizens and legal aliens.
Are frequently involved in crime.
Drop anchor babies, causing yet MORE drain on public coffers.
And on, and on.
Gay marriage affects OTHERS how??
hey, I dont care either way, I dont believe that neither the federal goverment nor the state should regulate marriage. civil unions yes, but marriage should have always been just in the pervue of the church.
since the state and feds have decided that they are allowed to make a profit off of people getting married, then the feds and state can regulate it how they want.
if you dont like it, then change the law and dont worry about what others say.
I believe each and every thing that a person does, says, or even thinks (even to themselves behind closed doors) can affect those they come into contact with, however subtly and indirectly. It's all connected. That being said, until we're aware of a negative effect of gay marriage on society (more negative than what we might find of heterosexual marriage, that is), denying gays the right to marry is unjustified.
Plus, I do think it's hypocritical to tell someone "Only gay people's opinions matter on gay marriage", knowing you would be in full support of heterosexuals pushing for it to be legalized nationwide...
hey, I dont care either way, I dont believe that neither the federal goverment nor the state should regulate marriage. civil unions yes, but marriage should have always been just in the pervue of the church.
Why would marriage be assigned to the Church? The Church didn't invent marriage, and didn't even enter the marriage game until over 1000 years after Jesus. So, why do they get dibs?
Why would marriage be assigned to the Church? The Church didn't invent marriage, and didn't even enter the marriage game until over 1000 years after Jesus. So, why do they get dibs?
because marriage is a religious function, or did you forget that little item?
because marriage is a religious function, or did you forget that little item?
No, it is not. Many people get married without the church. Before religion, people still formed committed relationships, before religion people still had children and raised families. Religion is just another form of control over the masses, no different than government. Why should religion be in control and which one is the one in control? Do you not see how there would be conflict? Europe went through this in the past with one religion having control over marriage, instituting their belief into a law forcing others to have a marriage in one church only for legality, any others being non binding. Then when the next church got control, they reversed the tactics. If one feels it is needed to have their vows witnessed before their god and church, fine, but to tell everyone else that they have to also is tyranny of the church. Guess it is easy to see why the government had to step in and create a civil union for all, that is recognized by all as equal, none being better or worse. That is all we gay and lesbian citizens want, fair and equal access to what you take for granted and we are denied for being gay.
because marriage is a religious function, or did you forget that little item?
Civil marriages were around LONG before the church.
In the US marriage is a civil, legal function. You can choose to have a church ceremony, but it is not required, and a church only marriage is not legally recognized.
A contract for marriage is a legal joining of property rights of two people for the benefit of progeny.
Until gay couples gene splice progeny, a contract for marriage is a nullity.
They would be better served by a civil union and a will.
Proof:
Look up the common law rights of curtesy and dower.
Both were predicated on there being children issued from the marriage. A childless marriage meant that the family of the deceased spouse had a superior claim to property of the deceased spouse.
Of course, since 1935, and national socialism, such mundane things like property rights have been surrendered in exchange for "entitlements".
As to the "right to contract" a useless contract?
Welcome to the 21st century:
Black's Law Dictionary:
marriage, n. (Bc) 1. The legal union of a couple as spouses. - The essentials of a valid marriage are (1) parties legally capable of contracting to marry, (2) mutual consent or agreement, and (3) an actual contracting in the form prescribed by law. Marriage has important consequences in many areas of the law, such as torts, criminal law, evidence, debtor-creditor relations, property, and contracts.
-Black’s Law Dictionary Ninth Edition 2009 Pg 1059
If a church, baker, photographer, videographer, wedding planner, b&b, etc. can maintain the right to decline the business of a homosexual couple without fear of legal repercussion, your argument holds more water. However, until people or businesses are able to opt out of doing business with gay couples if it violates their morals or religious doctrine, the opinion of others does matter otherwise you're forcing people to abandon their religious freedom under threat of litigation.
As long as these businesses or individuals can be hit with discrimination lawsuits for refusing the business of gay couples, they absolutely have a say in the matter.
Agreed. It doesn’t make sense that they would even want to do business with an establishment obviously not receptive to the homosexual agenda especially when there are plenty of other businesses that are. Even if they force a business to service them would anyone trust the food or service in a bad blood situation? Go where you are welcome and don’t make a stink about it all the time.
The homosexual agenda tries to equate sexual preference as a race when it is anything but. It’s a sexual preference. They want society’s “blessing” to actually look at two homosexuals as a “married” couple but society continues to demonstrate by the vote that not everybody is inclined to see them as such. Having activist judges overturn the will of the voters does not, and is not, going to change society’s perception either.
The homosexual agenda tries to equate sexual preference as a race when it is anything but. It’s a sexual preference. They want society’s “blessing” to actually look at two homosexuals as a “married” couple but society continues to demonstrate by the vote that not everybody is inclined to see them as such. Having activist judges overturn the will of the voters does not, and is not, going to change society’s perception either.
Seems like you're a self-appointed expert on the "homosexual agenda"... did you learn that from the newsletter, or did you garner that from extensive how different gay sex is from straight sex?
When it comes to equal rights in a supposedly free country, what "society" wants or accepts doesn't matter, really.
"Society," especially regressive, backwards thinking society, has always "not accepted" plenty of progressive ideals... from the end of slavery, to women's rights, to even freedom of religion and speech.
This segment of society, however, are rapidly aging and dying off (figuratively AND literally!). They always do. Of course, there are always holdouts, but they are relegated to the fringe where they belong. In a couple of generations they will be looked at with the contempt, embarassment and scorn that they deserve for their backwardsness in this respect.
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.
