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.
First off I think those stats are a big fat lie. I believe many Americans aren't opposed to a civil union for gays but not a traditional marriage and that is the difference.
So.......in other words, you pick and choose what "stats" you believe.
Gotcha.'
Let me guess - you believed the stats that said Mittens was going to be our next president.
I'd suggest moving to Africa or the Middle East then where those type of relationships are legal.
and one of the reasons it's possible for Middle Eastern men to fall for the idea that they will get 17 virgins in the afterlife if they suicide bomb. When there are no women available on this earth men will do drastic things. Few or none of the pro-polygamy ever do the math...if one man has 3 wives, two men will have zero wife. Same sex marriage will lead to polygamy which will lead to misery for millions of men.
Why do you feel the need to hurl insults at those who don't agree with you such as calling them bigots, haters and stupid? Is that really necessary in a debate?
I didn't insult anyone in any way at any time in that post. Not at all. You couldn't be more wrong, actually.
All I did was completely, accurately characterize some of the views and discussion in this thread as being the result of bigotry, hatred, fear and ignorance (or some combination thereof.)
This is precisely true and 100% valid.
Here's an idea--if people don't like their views or statements being correctly seen as bigoted, etc., then they should refrain from posting things that are clearly, inarguably bigoted, etc. Simple!
Here's another idea--since I already stated the fact, if you deem me wrong, then please post one single reason to oppose gay marriage that ISN'T born of hatred, fear, ignorance, bigotry or some combination of those things.
You can't and you won't, and here's why: no such reason exists. I've asked this same question on this forum and many others time and again and nobody has once even attempted to produce such a "reason."
This is because none exists.
Quote:
Interacial marriage was still a marriage between a man and a woman so your analogy fails. Sure there were many that opposed that also but there is still no comparison.
Here again, you could not be more wrong. The same people, speaking from ignorance, fear, hatred and bigotry, who sought to prevent interracial marriages from becoming legal a few decades back used the exact same baseless, hateful, ignorant, fearful and bigoted "reasons" and "arguments" to prevent interracial marriages as the people with the same attitudes do today with regards to same sex marriage. And they were, of course, utterly wrong and history has shown and proven them to be backwards-thinking ignorant bigots, as history in the near future will do the same for gay marriage opponents.
It bears repeating:
To preclude a consensual adult couple from marrying based solely on their gender is the very definition of bigotry and discrimination.
..civil unions will not necessarily equal full-marriage equality.
This is another salient point.
As they now stand, civil unions do not even come close to conferring the same legal rights and privileges as marriages do. Not even close.
The people who argue that "why can't these gays be happy with a civil union? We'll throw them that bone" are ignorant of the legal ramifications of marriage as opposed to civil unions.
Heck, often civil unions don't even remain in effect across state lines. A couple may enter into a civil union in one state, but if they end up moving to another state, their union may be null and void.
And that merely scratches the surface of the disparities between civil unions and marriage.
As they now stand, civil unions do not even come close to conferring the same legal rights and privileges as marriages do. Not even close.
The people who argue that "why can't these gays be happy with a civil union? We'll throw them that bone" are ignorant of the legal ramifications of marriage as opposed to civil unions.
Heck, often civil unions don't even remain in effect across state lines. A couple may enter into a civil union in one state, but if they end up moving to another state, their union may be null and void.
And that merely scratches the surface of the disparities between civil unions and marriage.
Then I suggest that gays in a civil union don't move to states that don't recognize their civil unions. It's that simple. Since you make it appear that you are an expert on civil unions vs traditional marriages please post what the differences are along with a viable link to prove your point.
Same sex marriage will lead to polygamy which will lead to misery for millions of men.
Do you have some kind of proof for this, or is it, as I suspect, just some baseless nonsense you pulled out of your behind?
You may not be aware of this, but this exact argument (as well as others) were used by people a few decades back who opposed interracial marriage in this country.
Fact is, interracial became legal and it did not set a legal precedent for polygamy.
Along with the "polygamy slippery slope" argument used years back, other opponents to interracial marriage also claimed such ridiculous BS as "If we let blacks marry whites, soon fathers will want to marry their children, siblings will insist on marrying each other, people will want to marry farm animals, etc...it will lead to anarchy and the dissolution of all of our values and the destruction of our civilization!"
Complete nonsense, based on nothing but hatred, fear, ignorance and bigotry.
Besides, why should it matter to anyone who wants to marry who?
When regarding consenting adults, it's really nobody else's business whether or not it is a same sex couple of a polygamist group.
Unfortunately, polygamy has historically been used as a means to coerce minors into marriages and sexual practices, but at its base--meaning simply plural marriage--why should it bother anyone else if it relates to consenting adults?
It's funny how the "small government" neocons consistently seem to want government intervention into bedroom acts, who can get married, what a woman can do with her body with respect to reproductive choice, they typically endorse the government having the right to invade sovereign nations with no just cause, to execute its own citizens via capital punishment, and so on.
Then I suggest that gays in a civil union don't move to states that don't recognize their civil unions. It's that simple. Since you make it appear that you are an expert on civil unions vs traditional marriages please post what the differences are along with a viable link to prove your point.
Is the GAO credible enough for you?
This is the list of benefits and legal protections of a federally recognized marriage. The federal government does not recognize ANY civil union.
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.
