Same sex marriage

[PLC1]

I said it before, and I'll say it again, states shouldn't be involved in marriage, nor should they grant privileges to married people not available to others. The real motivation of homosexuals in this is their on-going attempt to force people to view them as normal. Just as homosexuals have the right to engage in their sexual activities, others have the right to view them any way they please.

The states should not be involved in marriage. True.

The government should live within its means.
The border should be secure.
The federal government shouldn't do more than it has been authorized to do by the Constitution.
The war on poverty, war on drugs, and war on terror should be ended, or at least examined and changed to reflect reality.

There, you now have four more shoulds. Take two shoulds and five dollars to Starbucks, and you can have a latte.

 

[numinus]

The states should not be involved in marriage. True.

The extent of government involvement in marriage pertains only to human rights as defined. That and to act as arbiter in conflicts that is inherent in any form of human relation.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Libs, what do you think of heterosexual couples who engage in sodomy?

 

[top gun]

The real motivation of homosexuals in this is their on-going attempt to force people to view them as normal. Just as homosexuals have the right to engage in their sexual activities, others have the right to view them any way they please.

Isn't that what you to have actually been doin' all along... an on-going attempt to force people to view you as normal.

I mean that's what I thought at least... and I'm probably now less Conservative for it.

Maybe that's the solution. People will become even less gay inclined if they allow gay marriage everywhere.

I think I've found a solution!

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

How about not giving a **** what consenting adults do in their bedroom?

Why are christians so obsessed with homosexuality?

And why are so many priests caught enjoying it?

Makes you wonder

 

[top gun]

How about not giving a **** what consenting adults do in their bedroom?

Why are christians so obsessed with homosexuality?

And why are so many priests caught enjoying it?

Makes you wonder

Now you're just talkin' CRAZY TALK!

What would the "Christian" Far Right do with their time? I mean it appears many of them split their time pretty evenly between gay bashing and gay satisfaction.

If they stopped the bashing part then they'd have 100% gay satisfaction. That wouldn't work because if you're out prancing around gay ALL the time then someone will notice.

See when you break it down they really are doing the best they can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLncv9ubwGk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkWcT9CVOrs

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Fair point.

Sorry

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I think people who don’t want it legal are worried about the slippery slope

When abortion was first made legal it was always thought to be for a rape victim or someone who might die if they carry the baby to term, or a woman who had 2 kids and got pregnant a week before her and her husband divorced, or a college student.

but what it has become is people using abortion as birth control and even more sick twisted people waiting till they are 6 and 7 months pregnant to have the abortion even into the 8th and 9th month, And for the sickest of all reasons.

When abortion was made legal no one thought it would come to what it has come to.

I think it is the height (or depth) of hypocrisy to use the insane abuses of heterosexual abortion as an argument against gay marriage.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Slippery slope would be ok'ing homosexual marriage two men or two women. It cant end there, new protests for moromons who still practice polygamy and if that is ok'ed it wont stop there. Some woman with something to prove wants 3 husbands (not same as polygamy) then you never know if anyone saw woody allen's movie (everything you wanted to know about sex but were afraid to ask) there could be some sheep lover out there. Who am I to judge.

so if they change the laws to

anyone can marry anyone or group or anything, any time, any place for any reason. Then that would solve the problem for all time.

I would back a law like that and the stupid argument would be over

The argument is stupid, we agree on that. Contracts of any kind can only be entered into by consenting adults according to US law. Marriage was voted in to US law by the majority--not realizing that their religious ceremony would fall under the US Constitution's provisions once it was law. The Constitution requires equal protection. Only a few percent of the adult population are denied the legal contract we call "marriage" in the law. Gay people who are also consenting adults should have equal protection.

Sheep, appliances, children, and plants are not consenting adults, if you wish to change the law to include them you will have to do a major rewrite on US contract law--the whole basis of our laws in fact. Giving gay people the right to marry under US law would require almost nothing, 3-4% of the population simply gets covered by the existing law like they should have been all along. The whole idea of allowing sheep, appliances, and children to marry is an attempt to trivialize the discussion, to make it ridiculous, to make it so outrageous that no one could possibly support it.

Allowing gay people to have the same rights that you accept for yourself is no more "promoting" homosexuality than letting murderers marry is promoting murder.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

They already can, and no one's saying they can't.

All that's being said is that "what they want" is not, by definition, marriage.

The Law says it's "marriage". If people want to change the whole law and make "something else" the basis for all legal rights and responsibilities, I'm for it as long as it's the same for every consenting adult.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

What the STATE provides, to either gay or straight couples is a CONTRACT an agreement that certain rules will be enforced as to the rights of the individuals in said relationship and what to do with property in the event either one of them dies.

My take on the subject is that the STATE would be better off calling it CIVIL UNION for ANY couple and if any given couple wants to use the word MARRIAGE, so be it and nobody can stop them.

---- EOR ---- (end of rant)

The only downside to that is that the word "marriage" is written into law and we'd need to change a lot of laws to include any other name but "marriage".

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

That's already the extent of their role. As I said, two gay men can form a contract and call it a marriage, even hold a ceremony, and no one can stop them.

As for the legal rights and responsibilities of couples, can you name even one besides the raising of children?

I can provide you with a list of 1049 US laws that guarantee specific rights and privileges to ONLY legally "married" people. The list was drawn up by the GAO (Government Accounting Office) at the request of some Congress critters. There are a lot of things covered in the law that people don't realize. Some of the things can be gotten as you say through other means, but nowhere near all of them and when a move is made to another State the documents often have to be done all over again. Federal marriage law requires a reciprocity not given to other legal unions.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I said it before, and I'll say it again, states shouldn't be involved in marriage, nor should they grant privileges to married people not available to others. The real motivation of homosexuals in this is their on-going attempt to force people to view them as normal. Just as homosexuals have the right to engage in their sexual activities, others have the right to view them any way they please.

You know for sure that this is the motivation of all gay people? How? Are you Queen of the Gays or something?

I'm a transsexual and I support gay marriage because I'd like to be able to remain legally married to my spouse of many years. The anti-gay marriage folks are trying to get even long-term, legal marriages like ours set aside.

 

[Alexithymia]

I don't think I'm comfortable with the government having the power to decide who can and cannot get married. Why should two consenting adults have to worry about if the government approves of their relationship?

 

[PLC1]

I don't think I'm comfortable with the government having the power to decide who can and cannot get married. Why should two consenting adults have to worry about if the government approves of their relationship?

Exactly right.

I'm also not comfortable with the government deciding that a church must recognize gay marriages when conducting an adoption agency, either.

The government needs to take care of promoting the domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, and ensuring the blessings of liberty, and keep the hell out of what it has no business doing.