Question for gay marriage opponents (supporters, country, own, becoming)
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 really do think that in a perfect world, we'd have broken out the civil union concept from the "holy matrimony" concept...although I acknowledge the points that have been made about an exhaustive process of changing language in laws everywhere and how much simpler it would be to just allow for "gay marriage."
But consider it this way.
Take out sexuality from the equation. Two human beings, for whatever reason, decide to form a legal partnership commitment. They will own joint property. They will commit to care for one another in sickness and in health. They will be able to bypass probate in inheritance matters and receive tax benefits. They must be of the age of legal consent (which interestingly, in many places teenagers can get married and it emancipates them so the whole "adult" part of it doesn't even come into play if you're straight sometimes...but I think it SHOULD.) I think that people should be able to do this. I don't think that any church should be forced to perform any marriage that violates their principles, regardless of reason. I think however that if children are born or adopted to any couple, that it should be much harder to get divorced. I think that the presence of children adds a level of sanctity to any union...transforms a mere couple into a family in ways that no church or piece of paper can.
The concept of legal polygamy has been raised, I agree with whomever stated that if all parties are consenting and competant adults I don't see a big issue...but it does get complex when you start looking at the division of assets among a communal group. The main point of the civil end of all this and the legal rights and protections has to do with things like healthcare, tax benefits, estate rights, property rights...the law needs must concern itself with these very concrete things.
What about incest? Well, that is a little problematic even in cases of consenting adulthood due to the likelihood of genetic abnormality in offspring....all the way until we consider that a.) not all people marry to reproduce, or reproduce once they marry...and b.) we totally allow people with severe defects to get married and reproduce. Would you be the one to say that those with Down's Syndrome should never be allowed to marry or have children? What about dwarfism? Or any number of other genetic problems that really cause difficulties and medical problems during the lives of those affected...can any of us say "no, we should make it mandatory that such persons be sterilized and never have babies?" Wow, what an uncomfortable reality to think about. Gotta say, I don't love the notion of a woman with severe Down's Syndrome having sex or having babies. I question if she is competent to legally consent. But to challenge her right to do so, is really getting into some severe civil rights violation territory.
So even in situations where the likelihood that an offspring will be malformed, is very high, and the malformation will be very severe....we still don't have the right to deny a person the opportunity to have that child. Lest we tread the path of Hitler and his eugenics programs, we dare not.
So I would say that the arguments that a.) gay marriage will open the door to incest/polygamy marriage situations and b.) those things are unthinkable for reasons of abnormal children, abuse, disease...well not really, and no, and our society doesn't forbid things simply because of that.
By the by, an interesting point, slavery is still perfectly legal if there is consent involved. If two adults want to play at "master and slave" they can, and plenty do, the key that differentiates it from what is outlawed in our Constitution is consent. The difference between rape (a crime) and sex (not generally a crime) is consent. To say that the whole "consenting adults argument" is bunk is to deny the foundations of most of our laws regarding what is assault/abuse/not OK and what is frankly none of anyone's business.
And I still haven't heard back from our Biblical expert as to why it is that if our society's moral code is based pretty much on scripture...then all scripture need not apply. What, no stoning of harlots? No concubines? Tell me, do you shave your sideburns? Wear mixed blend fabrics? I've heard it all. Oh wait, that stuff was Old Testament, we don't pay attention to that. Oh, and this bit...it's inconveniently barbaric, we can drop that. But the parts we like, well we will stand by them on pain of hellfire...
Hey, if the Founders were so much like you, sir Calvanist, and your "my God is the only God" then what's with the Freedom of Religion bit? Was that only intended to imply that one is thusly free to go to different denominations of basically Christion church? Should we outlaw all mosques and kick out all the Bhuddists then? Burn the witches? After all...thou shalt not suffer them to live!
Because we want the choice to be ours to make, not forced on us against our will by the courts, or some far away federal bureaucrats and politicians.
I understand how you feel.
On some issues ... like civil rights and and laws concerning equal opportunity the "majority" does not get to force it's will on a minority. It is in the US Constitution. This is not a high school popularity contest. We do not live in a strict democracy but in a constitutional republic, and the judiciary takes it's role as defender of minority rights very seriously against "The Tyranny Of The Majority."
The majority has in it's power the ability to over-ride the US Supreme Court. They must pass an amendment to the constitution. There is a system of checks and balances.
On some issues ... like civil rights and and laws concerning equal opportunity the "majority" does not get to force it's will on a minority. It is in the US Constitution. This is not a high school popularity contest. We do not live in a strict democracy but in a constitutional republic, and the judiciary takes it's role as defender of minority rights very seriously against "The Tyranny Of The Majority."
The majority has in it's power the ability to over-ride the US Supreme Court. They must pass an amendment to the constitution. There is a system of checks and balances.
It doesn't matter how you explain it nor how many times. These crybabies think they're victims; that something is being "forced" on them. Same-sex marriage is legal here in Minnesota. Nothing was forced on me. Nothing happened. Absolutely nothing happened.
It's a flawed analogy because sitting at a lunch counter while black is the same activity as sitting at a lunch counter while white.
We can all eat at the lunch counter together and we owe a debt of gratitude to those who righted that wrong, but that doesn't mean any of us have the right to order something that is not on the menu and then complain we haven't been served when it is not provided.
I love to ask that question when I hear someone moan about (oohhh "I wish 'they'd' stop shoving their 'lifestyles' down my throat!")
I never get an answer. Never.
So, I've responded for them. I ask "Do you have gangs of gay folks canvassing your neighborhood, knocking on your door, demanding you open it, then when you do, they try to shove you into their SUV so they can drive you to an abandoned warehouse somewhere and initiate you by force into having sex with someone of your same sex within the group? Then they inject you with a secret drug that will compel you to have nothing but gay thoughts for the rest of your life? At that point, they drive you home, kick you out of the SUV, and leave you laying on your front lawn."
Is that what you mean by shoving lifestyles down your throat?
just wondering.....
P.S. I've never seen posters nailed to neighborhood lampposts depicting photos of gays in the throws of their lifestyles in all its glory either. (you know like those Missing Cat flyers around the hood).
You know very well what I was referring to. No, gay men do not bother me or hit on me, I spent about 3 months in Key West (an island in South Florida that has a pretty large and noticable gay community) and none of them hit on me. They can basically tell whose one of them and who isn't, I don't know how, but that's what a gay person told me.
By forcing their lifestyle onto others I explained for the thousandth time that they do so by violating the rights of those who disagree with them. They closed down a Christian bakery because they wouldn't bake a cake for a lesbian wedding, they took kids to a lesbian field trip, they want people tobe fired for disagreeing with their lifestyle, they call people homophobes for not agreeing with them, they try to sue Churches for not performing gay ceremonies, they use corrupt activist judges to overturn the will of the people, they have lobbied and bullied their way into the world of psychology so that only their views can be presented, they have hijacked Hollywood and pop culture which act as advertisers for their agenda, they use Political Correctness as a weapon to censor people, they lie and twist Biblical Scripture the justify their lifestyle, they lie and say children don't need a mother figure and a father figure even though it's been proven they do, they lie and downplay the higher risk of AIDS and every other STD that is associated with their lifestyle. They distort and use false science to further their agenda and try to present it as fact to the public.
That is pushing your lifestyle onto others. My enemy is not gay people, I love and treat them the same as everyone else. My enemy is the Rainbow Mafia whose goal is to violate the rights of others in their attempt to push their lifestyle agenda into our culture and onto everybody else.
Question for gay marriage opponents Do you really think there's any real chance it won't be legal everywhere in the country within 5-10 years? If not, why are you continuing to make such a big deal out of it?
Question for gay marriage supporters
Do you really think that EVERYONE is eventually going to come around to your way of thinking? There are people today that are still opposed to abortion, radical feminism and affirmative action/quotas. They see what is going on around the country, if the pro-homosexual marriage crowd can't vote their lifestyle in, in a particualr state, then they go by way of lawsuit and intimidation. They don't care what the residents of that state really want. They just want to force their lifestyle down their throats. Progressive radicals. You're all the same with your "Manifest Destiny attitudes (We're right, we know we're right and no one can tell us we're wrong. And you need to do what we say. For your own good.").Why does EVERYONE have to accept and celebrate your lifestyle?
That actually made me laugh out loud which I'm positive was not your intent. Too funny.
You are easily amused. Actually, it shows your ignorance.
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.
