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.
You can bet that there were a lot more gays there than the two women you saw. Probably 99% of them weren't "making out" with each other in public.
Two bits of advice:
1. Don't judge an entire group based on the actions of a few. To say that "gays force themselves upon you" is pretty ridiculous.
2. Don't even dream about controlling everybody and making them act the way you want them to act. In a free society, there will always be people you disagree with. Accept it, and if you see something you don't like, just move on. If they're not breaking the law, there's nothing you can do about it.
So what is the whole gay marriage issue about if it isn't about gays forcing their sex lives onto the rest of us? You've been offered civil unions with equal right to that of marriage just without the designation of marriage. That would still be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Why doesn't that make you happy?
So what is the whole gay marriage issue about if it isn't about gays forcing their sex lives onto the rest of us? You've been offered civil unions with equal right to that of marriage just without the designation of marriage. That would still be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Why doesn't that make you happy?
do you get a say in tim and jans marriage down the street? is their marriage forcing their sex lives upon the neighborhood and the world???
why do you get to have a say in mine and my partners? where do you get off thinking marriage is YOURS to hand out to people?
get a clue.... or educate yourself... one or the two...
So what is the whole gay marriage issue about if it isn't about gays forcing their sex lives onto the rest of us? You've been offered civil unions with equal right to that of marriage just without the designation of marriage. That would still be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Why doesn't that make you happy?
Separate-but-equal.
Ellen Degeneres said it best: It sounds like you're saying "You can sit there, you just can't sit there."
You can't restrict a minority from an institution based on who they are.
So what is the whole gay marriage issue about if it isn't about gays forcing their sex lives onto the rest of us?
I just don't buy your premise at all. Sorry.
Quote:
You've been offered civil unions with equal right to that of marriage just without the designation of marriage. That would still be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Why doesn't that make you happy?
I believe that all relationships between two adults should be treated equally. I don't care if it's called marriage or civil unions, but the same license should be given to same-sex couples as opposite-sex couples, in my opinion.
Unfortunately, many states have not only banned same-sex marriage, they've banned civil unions as well. The map on this page shows you the situation across the country:
Can someone explain to me what a "special right" is? Everytime the gay rights issue comes up, it's said they're asking for "special rights" (as opposed to "basic rights"). I never heard of this distinction outside of the gay rights debates.
So what is the whole gay marriage issue about if it isn't about gays forcing their sex lives onto the rest of us? You've been offered civil unions with equal right to that of marriage just without the designation of marriage. That would still be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Why doesn't that make you happy?
First of all, what makes you think that you are in the position to "offer" us anything? What are we, animals?
You no longer have a choice in the matter. We are no longer "bargaining" for our rights and freedoms and we are not going to go away quietly this time, until we get what we want.
You have certainly posted and participated in enough LGBT threads to know that Civil Unions do NOT provide the same rights as marriage. So, please, do us all a favor and quit feigning ignorance.
Last edited by equality4all; 06-25-2009 at 06:14 AM..
Eichelberger: They're not being punished. We're allowing them to exist, and do what every American can do. We're just not rewarding them with any special designation.
By these words, he makes it clear that he thinks gays should be punished in some way. As if GLBT people shouldn't be "allowed" to exist. I'm not gay, but I find that highly offensive, because I can't help but wonder who else this man thinks "shouldn't exist".
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleLove08
Another question: Do you feel granting legal recognition to same-sex couples is SPECIAL designation or the right thing to do? Why or why not?
It is simply the right thing to do because currently in most states it is we heterosexuals who have the "special right" to marry.
So what is the whole gay marriage issue about if it isn't about gays forcing their sex lives onto the rest of us? You've been offered civil unions with equal right to that of marriage just without the designation of marriage. That would still be defined as a union between one man and one woman. Why doesn't that make you happy?
You mean beyond the fact that we, as a country, have tried the whole separate but equal thing in the past and found it to be rather unequal?
If, and I do mean if, the what civil unions meant was changed to match that of marriage then some would be happy with it - my partner included, just not me. If however, we're talking about civil unions as they stand, forget it. At current, you (general you) could give us nationwide civil unions tomorrow and it would mean nothing. Nothing would change for us on a federal level unless the meaning of civil unions was first changed so what would be the point? As they stand civil unions are a far cry from marriage. Regardless of the meaning, until DOMA is repelled it is all a moot point anyway.
He's a heterosexual. There seem to be different standards for heterosexuals, especially heterosexual men.
And this heterosexual woman finds THAT offensive. I mean, if I can go into any public space and hold hands with my SO, why should my gay and lesbian friends not be able also to do so? And if I walk arm in arm through a local casino with my sister-in-law, why do so many jump to the conclusion that we are a lesbian couple? I still remember about 25-30 years ago one of my sons supporting another as he walked home after cutting his foot on broken glass at a local playground and a neighbor accusing them of being "sissy boys". You want to see a mother fly into a rage, just attempt to insult her children for acting on the lessons (take care of one another) that she has taught them!
Problem is gays force themselves upon you. Went to Disneyland a little while back- family place right-lots of kids around right. Well there in the parking lot waiting for the tram there are 2 lesbians making out. Do what you want in the bedroom but neither myself nor my kids want to see this type of behavior in public and no I did not see any straight couples doing the same thing to the degree that these gays were doing. Gays want respect well act respectfully.
"Making out"? In what way? Were they deep kissing? Or did one simply give the other a quick peck? Or were they simply standing with their arms around each other? See, this heterosexual woman has been accused of "making out" with her sister-in-law for simply supporting each other while walking through a casino! She has knee problems and I have back problems, so we often walk along with our arm around each other's waist, each supporting the other.
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.