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.
Nope sorry, only many Democrats support it. Conservatives do not.
Hold your horses, cowboy.
I am fiscally conservative and usually vote Republican. I don't care one way or the other if gays get married - it's fine by me and it's fine for them to call it marriage. I have my own particular ideological and moral view of marriage and what it is but I have no problem applying that to MY life and allowing others to apply their own interpretation of marriage to their own lives as long as all parties are of the age of consent. Heck, I don't even care if people have multiple spouses simultaneously - though I can't imagine why anyone would want that sort of drama in their lives.
Live and let live. People who love each other and want to build a life together with legal protections aren't hurting me in any way.
No, it is like saying that if it is legal for your neighbor to do something but illegal if you do it, then your rights are being violated.
At least try to make a rational argument.
How's this for rationale? It would be discriminating as a hetrosexual couple to be opposed to their hetrosexual neighbors wanting to marry. Why are you so adamant about a "traditional" marriage opposed to a civil union?
That is the WORST analogy EVER! Marriage has been defined as between one man and one woman since the dawn of time. Even the constitution does not define a "voter."
Why is it so hard for proponents of gay marriage to just admit they want to redefine a core tradition of western society instead of using buzz words like "equality" when they are not arguing for polygamy or any other forms of marriage?
It's not a child...it's a choice....
It's not a fundamental change to the core structure of the family...it's equality....
George Orwell must be so proud!
Who gets to define it and why are they against two people in love from getting married?
Do try to verbalize your objections rather than just hinting that you're operating on a plane that can't be attained by us mortals.
LMAO Keep posting. You made an absurd comment about incrimination and you have no idea the reason behind it. I get it, you say thing to say things. reasons aren't important right?
That is the WORST analogy EVER! Marriage has been defined as between one man and one woman since the dawn of time. Even the constitution does not define a "voter."
Why is it so hard for proponents of gay marriage to just admit they want to redefine a core tradition of western society instead of using buzz words like "equality" when they are not arguing for polygamy or any other forms of marriage?
It's not a child...it's a choice....
It's not a fundamental change to the core structure of the family...it's equality....
George Orwell must be so proud!
Really? So what document written forty five thousand years ago tells you that gem? Marriage is like all traditions throughout time, they change all the time.
It's an exact and perfect analogy -except jjrose got it backwards. Every time marriage law is changed, marriage is redefined. Every time voting law is changed, voting is redefined.
Voting is defined by voting law. Civil marriage is defined by marriage law. So yes, marriage is being redefined by eliminating bans on gay marriage just like voting was redefined when bans of women and black people from voting were eliminated.
That is the WORST analogy EVER! Marriage has been defined as between one man and one woman since the dawn of time. Even the constitution does not define a "voter."
Why is it so hard for proponents of gay marriage to just admit they want to redefine a core tradition of western society instead of using buzz words like "equality" when they are not arguing for polygamy or any other forms of marriage?
It's not a child...it's a choice....
It's not a fundamental change to the core structure of the family...it's equality....
George Orwell must be so proud!
I do see what you're saying and believe it or not, I agree with you when it comes to terminology. I personally consider marriage to be between one man and one woman, and yes, that's the way that the vast majority of Western society has defined it for thousands of years.
That being said, I guess it's the libertarian coming out in me - it's just not a burning issue with me one way or the other. I have my marriage, which fits my moral code and my beliefs, firmly in place and I am appreciative of all the benefits of marriage. I really just don't see how allowing other consenting adults the same freedom hurts me - or anyone else - in any way, shape or form.
I am fiscally conservative and usually vote Republican. I don't care one way or the other if gays get married - it's fine by me and it's fine for them to call it marriage. I have my own particular ideological and moral view of marriage and what it is but I have no problem applying that to MY life and allowing others to apply their own interpretation of marriage to their own lives as long as all parties are of the age of consent. Heck, I don't even care if people have multiple spouses simultaneously - though I can't imagine why anyone would want that sort of drama in their lives.
Live and let live. People who love each other and want to build a life together with legal protections aren't hurting me in any way.
So you are the exception to the rule. Big deal! The polls show that most conservatives oppose gay marriage. Want me to post one? Gays can get all the legal protection they want with a civil union. Gay marriage feels to me like we are going the way of the Romans long ago where anything goes.
Really? So what document written forty five thousand years ago tells you that gem? Marriage is like all traditions throughout time, they change all the time.
From integration to education to gay rights it always seems like the South lags far behind the rest of the country.
is the south really behind the rest of the country, remember the south is the bible belt, what you are complaining about is totally against the nature of the bible belt. it not that the south is lagging. it the south is a totally different world that the so called rest of the world. What make you so sure the rest of the nature isn't lagging behind the south.
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.
