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.
Well there are some possible problems with that as well. Here again, what about Atheists who don't want to go to a church? What about people that move here from non-Christian countries like India?
The thing is, churchs come in all shapes, sizes, and forms. After all, you can be married by Elvis in Las Vegas, and that ceremony isn't religious in the slightest.
Since Marriage under my plan would have no lawful significance, you can simply get your best freind to marry you, or your parents, or some stranger off the street.
They all have the same significance if the state isn't marrying, and doesn't acknowledge marriage as a legal term. Anyone can say they are married, for whatever reason, it would make no difference.
If you want to enjoy the same lawful rights that married couples do now, it would be under a civil union. Civil unions would be elevated in their legal rights, to that of exact legal standards of current marriage. The state can unite you, but it can not marry you.
The thing is, churchs come in all shapes, sizes, and forms. After all, you can be married by Elvis in Las Vegas, and that ceremony isn't religious in the slightest.
Since Marriage under my plan would have no lawful significance, you can simply get your best freind to marry you, or your parents, or some stranger off the street.
They all have the same significance if the state isn't marrying, and doesn't acknowledge marriage as a legal term. Anyone can say they are married, for whatever reason, it would make no difference.
If you want to enjoy the same lawful rights that married couples do now, it would be under a civil union. Civil unions would be elevated in their legal rights, to that of exact legal standards of current marriage. The state can unite you, but it can not marry you.
Perfect answer.
Wait... I think we already covered this somewhere in the first 3 or 4 pages
You're sure thorough though, I'll give you credit there
But yeah, that does sound like a working alternative. Though I don't see it happening. That would be change and we can't have that happening.
The term marriage is a religous term. Marriage is a religous practice belongs to religion.
Please forgive me and pray for me please because I do not won't to be intolerant of anyone, I have no right to be intolerant of others.
I just don't understand why the gay community insist having the term "marriage."
You say you do not want to be intolerant and I respect that, but do you not see that your question itself is of a most intolerant nature? You stated, in a round-a-bout way, that because you believe the term "marriage" to be religious, that gays have no right nor reason to use it- as if it is YOUR term, solely for "hetero" believers. That's silly! Not to mention unfair. Now I would assume that since you posted this topic, that you are not a fan of gay "marriage" so, what difference would it make to you if a gay person could explain to you why the word "marriage" is important to them, or why they "insist" (as you say) on using that as a way to describe their union, be it of a civil nature or a religious one? You know very well it's not about the word- it's about the union itself- that those against gay marriage/union have a problem with. Which I will never understand- I'm still waiting to hear just ONE good reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to marry/join in civil union- whatever. If anyone can give one, please go for it, I'm listening!
You say you do not want to be intolerant and I respect that, but do you not see that your question itself is of a most intolerant nature? You stated, in a round-a-bout way, that because you believe the term "marriage" to be religious, that gays have no right nor reason to use it- as if it is YOUR term, solely for "hetero" believers. That's silly! Not to mention unfair. Now I would assume that since you posted this topic, that you are not a fan of gay "marriage" so, what difference would it make to you if a gay person could explain to you why the word "marriage" is important to them, or why they "insist" (as you say) on using that as a way to describe their union, be it of a civil nature or a religious one? You know very well it's not about the word- it's about the union itself- that those against gay marriage/union have a problem with. Which I will never understand- I'm still waiting to hear just ONE good reason why gays shouldn't be allowed to marry/join in civil union- whatever. If anyone can give one, please go for it, I'm listening!
An intolerant question? And please no personal attacks please. These forums are for enlightenment.
Actually gay marriage is not as important to me is employment non-discrimination. If gays could get married in every state but I could still be fired from my job, then its not enough. I am once again in danger of getting fired for my sexual orientation, just like I was fired from my last job for that. I'm not out at work but people pretty much know I am gay because of the way I talk and walk and there is absolutely nothing I can do to change that, even if I did suppress my homosexual desires I would still outwardly appear gay. I don't understand why conservatives insist on keeping it legal to fire people over their sexual orientation. I can understand wanting exceptions in the law for religious organizations but there is no reason secular and government employers should even take sexual orientation into consideration as qualification for employment. What I do in my private life, as long as its within confines of the law, should have no affect on my job performance and therefore should be a non-issue.
Thanks for your post. You gave an additional dimension to be aware of. I live in "the bible belt" and have been around alot of gays during my life. A lot of the gays I've worked with and known in the community are pretty expressive of their sexuality and life styles and are recruitors for it. I have never been around anyone one has ever bashed them like what you have experienced. I do not feel that you have been fairly treated. Hope it gets better soon.
Wait... I think we already covered this somewhere in the first 3 or 4 pages
You're sure thorough though, I'll give you credit there
But yeah, that does sound like a working alternative. Though I don't see it happening. That would be change and we can't have that happening.
Maybe we did, I can't read all of these pages
I don't think it'll ever happen either. It would take some real political leaders to step out and do something like that. Also, most religious groups would be less likely to give up their power now, in order to preserve their definition of marriage.
Thats what they are upset about, not the term marriage, but the power they enjoy because of the term.
Thats what they are upset about, not the term marriage, but the power they enjoy because of the term.
Exactly. The religious right had tremendous, almost unconstitutional power during the 1950s and they started to slowly lose that power in the late 1960s. Gay marriage and acceptance of homosexuals for that matter is another step in taking away something they once had a monopoly over. That is why this is such a huge issue for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeThinkerInTex
Thanks for your post. You gave an additional dimension to be aware of. I live in "the bible belt" and have been around alot of gays during my life. A lot of the gays I've worked with and known in the community are pretty expressive of their sexuality and life styles and are recruitors for it. I have never been around anyone one has ever bashed them like what you have experienced. I do not feel that you have been fairly treated. Hope it gets better soon.
Most of the Bible Belt is not as extreme as Arkansas is. In fact, I wouldn't have a problem here in Charlotte if it were not for my supervisor being from Arkansas.
I never viewed the marriage as a religious thing. I think it relates more towards legal and civil rights reasons which is why the gay community wants it to apply to their relationships.
Thanks for your post. You gave an additional dimension to be aware of. I live in "the bible belt" and have been around alot of gays during my life. A lot of the gays I've worked with and known in the community are pretty expressive of their sexuality and life styles and are recruitors for it. I have never been around anyone one has ever bashed them like what you have experienced. I do not feel that you have been fairly treated. Hope it gets better soon.
"Recruitors" for their "lifestyle"?
What exactly do you mean by that???
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.
