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.
Everyone has valid points, as far as they go. I think the "sex with goats" people would tell you that, yes, admittedly, they're "reaching" when they make that silly argument, but they make it to illustrate that, really, the main argument AGAINST gay marriage is not a "provable" position, but rather it's because gay marriage, to date, is a concept that simply "outrages" the majority of society. As time goes on, this will no doubt fade, and at some future date, gay marriage will become less controversial. This may have already occurred in Europe, but in the USA, we have yet to reach that level of "enlightenment".
As far as the ACLU goes, as a disgusted former contributor, I can only say that they once had a brave and much-needed agenda, but, as the years have gone by, their "fights" have gotten sillier and sillier, to the point that now, they have lost much of their earlier credibility, and that, considering some of their "causes" in recent years, I don't think the "goats" scenario is all that far-fetched. Just my opinion....
I do not understand why this is even an issue in our society. Who cares who wants to get married? Well, PETA may not be happy about a little man/goat love, but.... Seriously though, I'm sick to death of perceived "sins" being used as political fodder!
Everyone has valid points, as far as they go. I think the "sex with goats" people would tell you that, yes, admittedly, they're "reaching" when they make that silly argument, but they make it to illustrate that, really, the main argument AGAINST gay marriage is not a "provable" position, but rather it's because gay marriage, to date, is a concept that simply "outrages" the majority of society. As time goes on, this will no doubt fade, and at some future date, gay marriage will become less controversial. This may have already occurred in Europe, but in the USA, we have yet to reach that level of "enlightenment".
As far as the ACLU goes, as a disgusted former contributor, I can only say that they once had a brave and much-needed agenda, but, as the years have gone by, their "fights" have gotten sillier and sillier, to the point that now, they have lost much of their earlier credibility, and that, considering some of their "causes" in recent years, I don't think the "goats" scenario is all that far-fetched. Just my opinion....
Thank you. That's what I was trying to say, but I didn't do a wholesome job.. However, people keep mentioning the "man-goat" thing, but I merely added that as a group that IS actually trying to make man/woman-goat action legal.
There is.. or at least "was" a group who fought for under-age consent. They were also BIG supporters of gay marriage
There IS a group that is all about multiple partners. Polygamists.
No, we shouldn't have to worry about opening doors for people stated above. But with enough protests, power, and money.. gay marriage, which was and still IS an outrageous idea to some, is starting to become less crazed and more widely accepted.
Personally, I'd love to allow gay marriage. But it just seems, to my crazed opinion, to be just a stepping stone for some of the groups that are backing gay marriage.
two consenting adults... you all are focusing on the sex aspect of the issue.. and NOT the relationship.. you demonize it in your mind because you think of the sex attached to it.. many straight people are married and have open relationships to do whatever sex they like... they are still able to be married to someone they are attracted to. goats cannot sign a piece of paper, and children cannot consent to a contract... so... your argument is based on sex.. not a contract with someone you love.
Thank you. That's what I was trying to say, but I didn't do a wholesome job.. However, people keep mentioning the "man-goat" thing, but I merely added that as a group that IS actually trying to make man/woman-goat action legal.
There is.. or at least "was" a group who fought for under-age consent. They were also BIG supporters of gay marriage
There IS a group that is all about multiple partners. Polygamists.
No, we shouldn't have to worry about opening doors for people stated above. But with enough protests, power, and money.. gay marriage, which was and still IS an outrageous idea to some, is starting to become less crazed and more widely accepted.
Personally, I'd love to allow gay marriage. But it just seems, to my crazed opinion, to be just a stepping stone for some of the groups that are backing gay marriage.
And that reasoning proves my point.
I noticed your posts on the smoking ban thread and you seem to feel that individual rights are important. How do you rectify that with not allowing gay marriage? Especially since some of your best friends through life have been homosexual.
I noticed your posts on the smoking ban thread and you seem to feel that individual rights are important. How do you rectify that with not allowing gay marriage? Especially since some of your best friends through life have been homosexual.
Fear of second-hand-gayness more than second-hand-smoke?
Fear of second-hand-gayness more than second-hand-smoke?
First of all, I am anti-smoking bans. Second of all, your post is nothing but a random flame simply because I don't "go with the flow" of changing laws. Third of all, I've had a relationship with another girl. Too much drama for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MooksterL1
I noticed your posts on the smoking ban thread and you seem to feel that individual rights are important. How do you rectify that with not allowing gay marriage? Especially since some of your best friends through life have been homosexual.
As I stated (briefly, but who cares, right?) I have nothing against gay marriage, but rather see it as a stepping stone for other groups who are backing gay marriage but have their own agenda. People can argue that in Europe, gay marriage is allowed but not here. I see that the age of consent varies per country with Spain's being 13.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boiseguy
two consenting adults... you all are focusing on the sex aspect of the issue.. and NOT the relationship.. you demonize it in your mind because you think of the sex attached to it.. many straight people are married and have open relationships to do whatever sex they like... they are still able to be married to someone they are attracted to. goats cannot sign a piece of paper, and children cannot consent to a contract... so... your argument is based on sex.. not a contract with someone you love.
I'm not focused on the physical part. My argument is that there are groups that are trying to CHANGE things to allow "contracts" to be signed by children or with multiple partners.
Nobody seems to want to address that part. Aside from the children or goat lovers.. since... that's just kinda sick. What about polygamists? Bi-sexual people wanting to marry both man and woman. If we allow two people of the same gender to marry... then what's to stop a woman from marrying both a man AND another woman?
well if someone wants to marry multiple people, then they need to take a look at what love is.. I love lots of people.. but I choose ONE person to build a life with.. and that someone is a person I love... so to limit it to two people does not discourage anyone who is bisexual from marriage.. it makes them narrow down to ONE person.. whatever they want to do or bring into it sexually is their own business.. but under the law.. Everyone should be allowed to choose someone they love and wish to build a life with under the law..
if you are married to a man.. and later fall in love with a woman.. then just like how it is now.. you have to choose.. and must divorce the man so that you can marry the woman...
Well, my initial reaction is "what's wrong with that?" Assuming everyone is of consenting age, why's that bad? There are many examples of successful multiple-marriages worldwide and here in the states.
I wouldn't want one myself, but I'm not a polygamist. I'm not gay, either. I just don't know if I should tell other people who to marry as long as everyone is a consenting, adult, human-being.
Still, I know a lot of you won't go with that, so for you, I'll just say the the slippery slope argument on this is a little tiresome. What evidence do we have to support that legalizing gay marriage would set a precedent for these things? We've adjusted marriage before to allow people of different races to marry, and that hasn't caused too many problems.
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.
Seriously though, I'm sick to death of perceived "sins" being used as political fodder!
