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.
thats cool, and since morals have derived from the Judeo Christian codes(the Commandments and teachings of Gods word in western society---there is nothing judgmental or hateful about what people are saying here, But we have already gone through the hateful and judgemental.
many are judgemental about many things, some people judge and hate people who are racist, sexist, etc so judgement is pretty objective.
I'd say that's pretty obvious, we already regulate food safety, not morals.
The reason I made that statement is because the gay community runs a greater risk of several unsafe elements, whether because of rejection of mainstream society or something else. Disease, depression, suicide, etc. Anyway, that was why I asked.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207
They don't, burdell. That's not at all what I am saying. What I'm saying is that I'm opposed to the government getting into it. They wanna shack up...shack up. But if the government begins to lean towards recognizing that as marriage, I'd oppose it.
I don't think I'm doing a good job being clear today.
You're right, you're not being clear.
You said: "I am opposed to any action of the government that would imply that the 'shacking up' lifestyle is acceptable."
Are you also opposed to any action of the government that would imply the 'shacking up' lifestyle is unacceptable?
Personally, unless they're paying the bills I don't think it's the government's danged business.
What part of this aren't ya'll (southern sorry) getting????
I'm talking about the government recognizing 'shacking up' as some form of legally recognized union. <What's this thread about again?>
I 'shacked up' before I was married. I did not try and get all the legal rights of marriage while I was doing it.
Did you eventually get married? Or stay shacked up to the same person for 40 years, go on vacations, buy things, buy a home, have a life together, then die and have your "roomie", kicked to the curb with nothing?
No shacking up shouldnt be a legally recognized union. But they should be allowed to have one if they want one.
and since we do moralize and make it law on many thing, we regulate behavior, all the time. Hate Crime legislation is one such moralizing, it punishes people for what they say even to some people or intimidation based on race, ethnicity, etc.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207
The reason I made that statement is because the gay community runs a greater risk of several unsafe elements, whether because of rejection of mainstream society or something else. Disease, depression, suicide, etc. Anyway, that was why I asked.
And some races run a greater risk of certain disease than other races, if it's a genetic trait, and I believe being gay is, I dont believe it can be legislated away.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinajack
and since we do moralize and make it law on many thing, we regulate behavior, all the time. Hate Crime legislation is one such moralizing, it punishes people for what they say even to some people or intimidation based on race, ethnicity, etc.
So we right morals into law all the time.
That's only regulating public behavior, not what thos people do/believe in private.
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.