Questions for people who support gay marriage (lawyer, Somali, voted)

[jazzy jeff]

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

No one said anything about doing away with marriage.

Clearly people here don't read well...

I said... The government has no business licensing what us in effect merely a contract between two private parties.

Does the government license other contracts? Nope...

People are so busy trying to push their religious or gay rights agenda on everyone else that they clearly and quite stupidly fail to realize that they are fighting the wrong battle.

The government can protect the rights of a married couple without interfering in who enters into the contract.

If the government were to cease issuing licenses and move to merely registering them, similar to deeds, birth certificates, etc, then the entire fight is finished.

So what I think you are proposing is the Government does not decide who can and can not get married, but yet marriage benefits issued by the Government remain in place? I fail to understand how that would make any difference to those that oppose SSM. Also by what means would a couple declare themselves married?

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by jazzy jeff

So what I think you are proposing is the Government does not decide who can and can not get married, but yet marriage benefits issued by the Government remain in place? I fail to understand how that would make any difference to those that oppose SSM. Also by what means would a couple declare themselves married?

1) It makes no difference to those that oppose it but their opposition is meaningless. I might not think someone of your race (just hypothetical, I neither care nor even know your race) should live in my neighborhood. Yet I can't legally interfere with any contract you enter into when buying a house there.

2) People declare themselves married the same way a corporation declares a merger, or a home buyer buys a home, or a person finances a car, or a person is hired by an employer. By signing a contract...

I'm not understanding how this could be a difficult concept.

Hell the govt doesn't do anything now except:
1) issue the marriage license form, check it is duly filled out and signed by the proper people and register it.
2) decide who can get married.

1) is a legitimate function of govt
2) is not a legitimate function of govt

Remove #2. Done and done...

The govt can just point to the equal protection clause and state that it must treat all people equal and recognize all legally drawn up contracts which it already does and every marriage is now protected by the govt.

Seriously, then the gay/lesbian/et al crowd is happy and the religious bigots are cut off at the knees...

How hard is that?

[bigskydude]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

Because they're stupid, illogical questions that have been addressed countless times. Only the anti-gay crowd associates same-sex marriage with pedophilia. It's called the slippery slope fallacy.

heh .. Not really so much of a fallacy after all me thinks .. Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals :: Northern Colorado Gazette ...

There's coming a time in this nation when sexual orientation will reign supreme and freedom (quite literally) will ring .. It won't make much of a difference really .. that is .. until making love to your toaster kills you because you forgot to unplug it

[jjrose]

Originally Posted by bigskydude

heh .. Not really so much of a fallacy after all me thinks .. Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals :: Northern Colorado Gazette ...

There's coming a time in this nation when sexual orientation will reign supreme and freedom (quite literally) will ring .. It won't make much of a difference really .. that is .. until making love to your toaster kills you because you forgot to unplug it

Old news. That is about a group called B4UACT. They are trying to reduce the stigma of people with attractions to children so that they will seek treatment and support BEFORE they act on those feelings.
They are not seeking marriage to children, or even to have sex with children.

[bigskydude]

Originally Posted by jjrose

Old news. That is about a group called B4UACT. They are trying to reduce the stigma of people with attractions to children so that they will seek treatment and support BEFORE they act on those feelings.
They are not seeking marriage to children, or even to have sex with children.

Oh? .. Even as late as April 2013? .. I hardly think this is old and should be blown off .. Gay Rights Activists went on and on for years before people started listening, and according to this, Lawmakers are writing legislation with regard to this whole pedophilia rights thing ..

Republicans attempted to add an amendment specifying that, “pedophilia is not covered as an orientation.” However, the Democrats defeated the amendment. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) stated that all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law, and accordingly decided that pedophilia is a sexual orientation that should be equally as embraced as homosexuality.

Does a California bill really classify pedophilia as a “sexual orientation”? | Fr. Z's Blog

heh .. slippery slope on steroids

[Ceist]

Originally Posted by bigskydude

Oh? .. Even as late as April 2013? .. I hardly think this is old and should be blown off .. Gay Rights Activists went on and on for years before people started listening, and according to this, Lawmakers are writing legislation with regard to this whole pedophilia rights thing ..

heh .. slippery slope on steroids

Certainly is a "slippery slope on steroids". Some people are gullible enough to believe right wing hysterical comments on someone's blog and spread it around as 'fact'.

[Rlarson21]

I support gay marriage because I was born with a homosexual orientation without choice. And I would like to have the same options that those born with the heterosexual orientation have including my brother and sistet and parents and they agree with me.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by RomaniGypsy

People in our society want it because we have been conditioned by the propaganda machine to want it.

People in our society think we have been conditioned by the propaganda machine to want it because we have been conditioned by the propaganda machine to think that.

See how pointless such nonsensical throwaway lines are?

You don't like the fact that your perspective is held by a smaller number of people than would be necessary to have your perspective prevail. Message received. Get over it. Stop trying to rationalize the decline of what you prefer by taking vacuous pot-shots at reasonable people who simply disagree with you.

Originally Posted by RomaniGypsy

This stems from those in power realizing that religion encroaches upon their ability to control people and/or earn vast quantities of money.

I have to give you credit for a novel approach. However, it's poppycock. People do things to foster their own power and feed their own avarice without regard, or often in the name of religion. So unless you're living on Upside Down Planet, your thesis is without merit.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by Jaymax

Certainly is a "slippery slope on steroids". Some people are gullible enough to believe right wing hysterical comments on someone's blog and spread it around as 'fact'.

A Correction and an Apology

A few days ago, an old article of ours from a few months back received a link from a large organization.

Prior to this, we were a small grassroots website with an equally small, but very dedicated, readership. In other words, we were not expecting anywhere near the amount of attention that this piece received.

One of the sources from which we obtained our information was incorrect, unbeknownst to us at the time of publication, and remains that way as of this writing. A staff member of Rep. Jackie Speier’s contacted us regarding those inaccuracies.

The only thing is............

In a 2/7/13 post titled, Pedophilia Is A Sexual Orientation Under CA Bill, Writer Lisa A. suggests that pedophilia is a sexual orientation, which it is not.

Sorry, how do we know that it is not? This does take us off topic but at least this does address the earlier post.

[RomaniGypsy]

Originally Posted by jjrose

Examples of people being fired, sued, or punished for stating an opposition to SSM?
As for harassing, and attacking, those are responses from people about others beliefs. Can you show an instance of an employer, or government attacking or harassing a person over their anti SSM stance?

LifeSiteNews Mobile | ‘I am still not getting what I want’: Gay couple suing church for refusing ‘wedding’

This is in England, but as goes the rest of the world, so tends to go America.

State’s case against florist fires up gay-marriage critics | Local News | The Seattle Times

This article cites at least three examples of people in wedding businesses being sued for not serving gay couples. The main example involves a business being sued BY THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL for not serving a gay couple due to the owner's religious beliefs.

Christian Airman Claims He Was Fired by Lesbian Commander for Gay Marriage Stance

Though this would be hard to prove and probably arguable, it seems logical.

Christian Consultant Fired by Bank of America Over Gay Marriage Book

Teacher Opposed to Gay Marriage Could Be Fired - FOX News Radio

Fired for signing a gay marriage petition

Do you really need more?