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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-02-2012, 12:21 AM
 
Location: Albuquerque, NM
13,285 posts, read 15,310,576 times
Reputation: 6658

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
Any gay man or woman can marry someone of the opposite sex - so they already have equality.
The problem with only allowing opposite sex marriage is that it is discriminatory to EVERYONE. Any straight man or woman cannot marry someone of the same sex - the law is discriminatory based on sex.


Quote:
and guess what - love is not a requirement for marriage anyway.
Neither is the ability to reproduce, but you seem to be championing that as a reason why same-sex marriage shouldn't be allowed.

 
Old 10-02-2012, 12:24 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,389,418 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
Love is not a requirement for marriage.

Gays cannot make a family together.

A home and life can be made whether married or not.

so what is the point in this idealistic piece of paper?
What do you think 'the point of it' is for heterosexuals couples?
 
Old 10-02-2012, 12:26 AM
 
Location: The Cascade Foothills
10,942 posts, read 10,257,854 times
Reputation: 6476
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
Love is not a requirement for marriage.
Not a "requirement," but it certainly is traditionally an incentive.

Quote:
Gays cannot make a family together.
Wrong. They can make a family together and many do by adoption or by biological children one or both have had from a previous relationship (my own brother shares a now grown son with an ex-wife who left him for a woman; she and her same sex partner have been together now for many years).

And, besides, what makes a family? Can't two people who love each other be considered a "family?" Many straight couples choose to not have children (or perhaps are unable to) and often think of themselves as a family, oftentimes including their beloved pets as part of their "family."

Who defines "family?" You?

Quote:
A home and life can be made whether married or not.
This is true.

As a twice divorced person, I tend to be somewhat cynical about the institution of marriage.

I have five sons and I have made it clear to each of them that I don't think marriage is a necessity. Only two of my boys have been married - my oldest has been married and is now divorced and he has full custody of his daughter and my middle son (23) has been married for two years. My second to the youngest son is in a committed live-in relationship with his girlfriend (they've been together five years).

I will never marry again.
Quote:
so what is the point in this idealistic piece of paper?
Nothing (from my cynical point of view). But it should not be denied to those couples, straight or gay, who want it. It should certainly not be available to one segment of our society (straight) while being denied to another (gay).
 
Old 10-02-2012, 12:36 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, California
4,373 posts, read 3,229,965 times
Reputation: 1041
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
you mean you stopped reading when you idealistic bigot shield was switched on.

Your ideology prevented your further research of the subject.

= bigot.
OR you have a strong shroud of ignorance clouding your mind and you refuse to open to other possibilities.

I provided 3 ways for Same-Sex couples to have children yet you respond with bigotry and hatred.

That attitude = bigotry in it's basest form. No worries, I'll report that personal attack now.
 
Old 10-02-2012, 12:41 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles, California
4,373 posts, read 3,229,965 times
Reputation: 1041
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
Any gay man or woman can marry someone of the opposite sex - so they already have equality.
Um what? How is that equality if they can't marry someone of the same sex? That just reeks of illogical fallacy. You're toting the 'separate but equal' line here. That doesn't work and is unconstitutional.

Quote:
and guess what - love is not a requirement for marriage anyway.
True. Arranged marriages still take place in this modern day and age.

Quote:
So the tired old whine from the SSM crowd of 'gays should be allowed to marry the person they love' is just a completely moot point.
Yet the detractors say it a lot to. I honestly have no idea what makes you so much better than the same sex crowd. Are we not all Americans? Are we all not human beings? Why should you or I get exclusive rights and not a certain sect of people? Can you really explain that with logic and intellect?

Quote:
It has no value.
You're right - arguing against SSM and the ideas that homosexuals can continue to be treated as second class citizens does indeed have no value. You seem to lack them, actually. I feel sorry for you.
 
Old 10-02-2012, 01:42 AM
 
Location: McKinleyville, California
6,414 posts, read 10,495,242 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
Any gay man or woman can marry someone of the opposite sex - so they already have equality.

and guess what - love is not a requirement for marriage anyway.

So the tired old whine from the SSM crowd of 'gays should be allowed to marry the person they love' is just a completely moot point.

It has no value.
That is the same old tired argument used against interracial marriage. Since a white could not marry a black person, it was considered equal to deny a black person the right to marry a white, neither could marry each other. That was declared unconstitutional and so will all bans on gay marriage and the result will be a huge roar from all the very same bigoted type of people that opposed and still oppose interracial marriage. They said allowing interracial marriage was going to be the down fall of the USA and that did not happen. The only way to progress is to go forward, otherwise we will just stagnate or rot. Are you married? Did you marry for convenience or out of love? And why would any gay person want to marry a straight person and what straight person would want to subject themselves to a married life that is a sham. Don't you think the couple should know in advance of either partners sexuality before they even get engaged? Would you want your daughter or sister to marry a gay man or your brother or son to marry a lesbian, just to keep the status quo? Other than the bible and its ancient moral codes, there is no real reason to deny marriage or its benefits to gays and lesbians. We are citizens of this country as much as you are and deserve to reap the same rewards. Denying us the same exact equal rights as you receive is outright discrimination and treats us as second class citizens with no just cause other than your biblical paranoia.
 
Old 10-02-2012, 01:54 AM
 
73 posts, read 46,165 times
Reputation: 32
did I ever mention the Bible? - I think not.
 
Old 10-02-2012, 01:57 AM
 
73 posts, read 46,165 times
Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok View Post
The problem with only allowing opposite sex marriage is that it is discriminatory to EVERYONE. Any straight man or woman cannot marry someone of the same sex - the law is discriminatory based on sex.
It is only discriminatory to those who do not fit the criteria, such as those of the same sex, family, persons already married, of legal age etc.

No big deal.

so why aren't you bleating for them too?

Time for the SSM crowd to man-up and get over it!
 
Old 10-02-2012, 01:59 AM
 
73 posts, read 46,165 times
Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax View Post
What do you think 'the point of it' is for heterosexuals couples?
To start their own family together, by the natural method.
 
Old 10-02-2012, 02:14 AM
 
Location: The Cascade Foothills
10,942 posts, read 10,257,854 times
Reputation: 6476
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence-law View Post
To start their own family together, by the natural method.
What about couples who are infertile?

Or who are past childbearing age?

If marriage is for couples to "start their own family together, by the natural method," then what about those couples who can't, or don't want to, start families (by your definition of "family")?

Should they be denied the right to marry?

Anyway, we've all been here before - the same tired, regurgitated bulls**t from those who want to deny fair and equal and legal rights to same sex couples.

I know there will always be bigots, but I do believe that the law will trump them and that some day marriage equality for everyone will be 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.


Closed Thread


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. The time now is 10:03 PM.

© 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