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.
Maybe the two of you can compromise, but do you think the entire country would too? I doubt the majority of straight Americans would be willing to give up legal marriage, and gay Americans want equality with whatever they/we have. So while it's a nice thought (and personally I have no opinion good or bad on the idea), it's doubtful that will happen in reality - at least not within our lifetimes.
I don't see how affording gay Americans the same rights we heterosexuals have is viewed as "giving up legal marriage". How would we be giving anything up?
Cheap shots will get your everywhere then I guess?
How about the Gay Marriage Agenda try helping 1/100 of the people that Catholic Charities helps every day and then we'll talk?
What an odd thing to say.
The SSM movement isn't about charity, it's about rights. I'm sure many of the people involved in the SSM movement are charitable too - gays and straights alike.
Incest is one thing, the gay act is a diabolical act which cause's nausea to the Divine... The devils themselves despise the homosexual. They not only fail in resisting the weakness of fallen human nature, but do much worse in an act against nature. Behold a womens very inspired quote some years ago... " It is disgusting to the devils not because evil displeases them or because they find pleasure in good, but rather because their nature is angelic and flees upon seeing such a repulsive sin being committed. For while certainly it is the devil that first strikes the sinner with the poisoned arrow of concupiscence, nonetheless when a man actually carries out such a sinful act, the devil goes away" Catherine..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
There ya go Harrier. Apply my previous mistimed statement to your agreement with stargazzer. I don't want to be forced or force other to abide by religious dogma I don't believe. Sure you don't either.
Lets not be absurd...homosexuality is a financial liability to the world. Just add up health care, mental health needs, research for aids and get back when you balance the books....good luck on that one. Ever heard of the disease aids...do some CDC checking as well dollars in global research and let me know how you make out. The homosexual act is scientifically proven to be the reason why aids is what it is, the act fuels the disease. And you guys want to talk about subsidizing and money.
Ooooh! Will you post your numbers?! Please? With a cherry on top? I really want to see this ledger!
1) There is no such thing as a gay marriage regardless of any law, within the human language. See above post. A document cannot deceive or change the meaning of words, without being clear. The job of a document is being clear.
2) .. statistics show...gay people have on average over hundreds of sexual partners in a life, married or not.
3) DC is over 3% hiv. Its so bad there was a convention a while ago because of all the women becoming infected by the bi guys. There is anger.
The disease can be quiet for up to 8 years but...infecting all the while without anyone knowing...it is a scientific fact the male/male fuels the disease. If you need links..please ch yourself.
the gay act is immoral, it cannot be argued without changing the English language.
There is no such thing as a gay marriage, there can only be , within the english language a relationship "like or near....the understood event known as marriage.
That's funny that you won't post links to your own assertions. Since you can't be bothered to prove your own statements, I can't either.
When slavery was abolished the term "American citizen" was redefined.
When women's suffrage passed the term "voter" was redefined.
The bottom line: people of the same sex can already legally marry in some states here in the US and in several countries around the world. You may be opposed to marriage equality, but it is already a fact in many places.
Yep! Spot on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
Your trivializing the horrors and injustices that black Americans experienced - and the unequality demonstrated towards women concerning voting - by daring to comapare them to homosexuals - does you absolutly zero credit.
It only shreds your credibility - not that you ever had any if you would resort to such an asinine argument.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself for marginalizing black Americans and women in that manner.
He is not trivializing anything! He is simply stating that definitions of words/institutions change over time.
You are shredding your own credibility with your hyperbolic, faux outrage.
The bottom line: people of the same sex can already legally marry in some states here in the US and in several countries around the world. You may be opposed to marriage equality, but it is already a fact in many places.
Not true at all. SSM is not marriage equality. It's just confirming government's power to tell us how to live.
The only way we can achieve marriage equality is to get government out of marriage.
Who's arguing about plural marriage? It's got nothing to do with same-sex marriage.
If people who want polygamous marriage can put a good legal case forward as to why it should be legal then they can.
It has everything to do with SSM. If you can change the definition of SSM to fit your agenda, others can do the same.
A good legal case has nothing to do with this debate. The debate is simply about changing a law because some people want to change it to fit their agenda.
Government should completely get out of the marriage business altogether.
Civil contracts of committment should be enforced by the courts. Couples can call themselves married and that title could be conferred by religious bodies or any non-governmental entity - but it would hold no legal meaning - nor would any special benefits accrue to such civil contracts.
This would solve the controversary. Do you agree or disagree with my common sense proposal and if you disagree - would you please explain , why?
'Common sense' should tell you that you should do some research first on just how entangled marriage and the government is before naievely saying that the 'government should get out of the marriage business'.
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.
I'm sure many of the people involved in the SSM movement are charitable too - gays and straights alike.
