Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-06-2009, 01:54 PM
 
1,117 posts, read 1,990,165 times
Reputation: 982

Advertisements

Marriage, in the "technical" sense of the word is basically a legal agreement between two consenting adults. Currently, most states require that those two adults be at least 18 years old, of the opposite sex, and unrelated biologically.

But hey, I'm open to making some changes there. Since the "romantic" aspect of marriage is more of a cultural and religious spin on things, I don't see any reason why states can't focus on the legal aspects of marriage and loosen the requirements a bit so that the two consenting adults entering into the legal agreement don't have to be of the same sex.

The "romantic" aspect of marriage should be optional and personal/private. People should be able to marry even if they aren't romantic with one another. It's a LEGAL agreement as much as anything else, and it shouldn't be limited to just man/woman having sex.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-06-2009, 01:59 PM
 
Location: London UK & Florida USA
7,923 posts, read 8,822,894 times
Reputation: 2059
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerCaliforniaGirl View Post
Marriage, in the "technical" sense of the word is basically a legal agreement between two consenting adults. Currently, most states require that those two adults be at least 18 years old, of the opposite sex, and unrelated biologically.

But hey, I'm open to making some changes there. Since the "romantic" aspect of marriage is more of a cultural and religious spin on things, I don't see any reason why states can't focus on the legal aspects of marriage and loosen the requirements a bit so that the two consenting adults entering into the legal agreement don't have to be of the same sex.

The "romantic" aspect of marriage should be optional and personal/private. People should be able to marry even if they aren't romantic with one another. It's a LEGAL agreement as much as anything else, and it shouldn't be limited to just man/woman having sex.
You are soo right. Marriage is a legal action wrapped in a religous, or not, ceremony. Humans created marriage and it is now mainly as a symbol or for legal reasons, tax reasons etc.
No reason on earth why gays can't get married.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:01 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,592,923 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Ooh, you want to get married, well that problem is marriage is a religious function, and governments should play no role, so instead of protesting your "wish", to get married, maybe you should be protesting the involvement of marriage with government...
Governments play a huge role for now, whether we like it or not. The suggestion that gays should focus on getting the government out of marriage is ridiculous, given the reality of how marriage laws are structured right now.

Anyway, if you want government out of marriage, you can go protest yourself. Most people know that they're going to find more success working with the system we've got, rather than trying to tear it down and start over again.

Last edited by AnUnidentifiedMale; 05-06-2009 at 02:53 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:10 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,826,707 times
Reputation: 7118
I'm sure it will pass, but they should put it to a vote by the citizens of the state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:11 PM
 
Location: Virginia Beach
8,346 posts, read 7,020,902 times
Reputation: 2874
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
I'm sure it will pass, but they should put it to a vote by the citizens of the state.

It already passed and is made into law.

Issues such as that should not be held to a vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth/Dallas
11,887 posts, read 36,829,643 times
Reputation: 5663
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefinalsay View Post
this is the way it should be. handled at the state level.
I agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:23 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,158,526 times
Reputation: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langlen View Post
Issues such as that should not be held to a vote.
Why? Are you afraid of what the Citizens of the State might say?

Heck, I can even envision a referendum being proffered to repeal the legislation being put on the ballot. That is the right given to the people by the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:24 PM
 
239 posts, read 351,602 times
Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Why? Are you afraid of what the Citizens of the State might say?
Go leave a server 20 bucks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth/Dallas
11,887 posts, read 36,829,643 times
Reputation: 5663
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
I'm sure it will pass, but they should put it to a vote by the citizens of the state.
I kind of agree with that statement, but the legislators are supposed to represent the constituents. If they thought that this was something their constituents didn't want, they would fear being voted out of office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2009, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Virginia Beach
8,346 posts, read 7,020,902 times
Reputation: 2874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Why? Are you afraid of what the Citizens of the State might say?
Yes, actually, I am. America hasn't exactly caught up with the rest of the modern world in terms of accepting homosexuality. I don't believe that we should be voting on whether or not we extend equality to a minority.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top