Marriage or Civil Union - Page 13

**shel90** · 03-05-2009, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsfoster

In this case, they very easily compare. People's rights are people's rights. If I wanted to move to Texas and start a ballot saying that deaf people could only get civil unions, I could easily do so. If I led a completely illegal and misleading campaign that won, and suddenly deaf people could only get civil unions, would you feel that the "people had spoken"?

I've already said I support deaf civil unions. I believe that the definition of marriage is two hearing people. I don't have anything against deaf people, I just don't see why they need to call their union a marriage. I mean, how can you be married when you can't even hear each other? God created humans with ears, so clearly ears and hearing are an important component to marriage. In a deaf union, the "plumbing" just isn't serving its intended function.

Deaf civil unions all the way!

(Loving this comparison, though!

Every time I think it can't get any better, it somehow does!)

(Oh, and Byrdie, you can get married, but only cause you're special.

)

Oh my gosh!!! Very good point!

pathymo · 03-05-2009, 09:37 PM

A long read, but here is my response! I posted this on another forum I belong to, and is relevant here.

Naturally, as a gay man I am against Proposition 8. I do not believe that discrimination should be written into any constitution, state or federal. I also believe on a state and federal level, gay marriages should be recognized. This does not mean that I believe a Church should legally have to marry gay people. I believe this is where the line is blurred.

Gay marriage is not about gay people walking into a religious institution and getting married. The fact of the matter is, gay people getting married in churches will happen whether or not it is 'legal'. The issue at hand is a marriage license not being granted or recognized by the state, and gay people not getting equal legal rights that come with a state recognized marriage license. It has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with equal rights under the law.

Unfortunately, even if states recognize gay marriages, because of President Clinton's stupid decision to sign the DOMA the marriage will still not be federally recognized. So a gay couple who is legally married (in CT or MA) can file jointly for state taxes, but not federal taxes. And there are of course no kinds of federal protection under the law.

Really what should happen is that the title of "marriage license" should be changed. That way, everyone goes to a court house to get a "Civil Union License" or "Yipa doo da License", and then those people are recognized under the law as a Union and are therefore granted certain rights under the law. Then if people choose to do so, they can go to a Church and get married.

And one side note, after reading some past posts...... parents cannot shield their children from the world. Sorry, it can't happen. Growing up, I knew I was gay. From a very young age I knew I liked boys, not girls. My parents didn't have to teach me about an "alternative lifestyle" for me to know what I wanted. Also, at least in my school, my parents had to sign a paper saying it was ok for me to attend sex ed class when we had to learn about that. If the parents didn't sign the paper, the kid didn't have to go. No reason that couldn't be done again. But I digress....

If a kid is going to be gay, the kid is going to be gay. What is damaging to the child is not to nurture or discuss these kinds of feelings, but to condemn these feelings. The highest rate of suicide is among LGBT teenagers. Why? Because they're constantly told it is wrong, disgusting, against God, against this against that, yadda yadda yadda. Couple that with the fact that you can't get married, there are people who want to kill you for who you are, and God doesn't love you anymore. Not much reason to live.....

I'm extremely fortunate for my family. I was never told I was less than human, that I was disgusting, CHOOSING to "act" on unnatural feelings. When I came out at 15, my parents said "ok, we want you to be happy, safe, healthy... if this is who you are, we don't love you any less and we are here to love and support you". To think I was ever afraid to come out to them.... but many kids are, because of how their parents talk about the issue, how society views the issue. That its an "alternative lifestyle".... uh, no. Living out in the woods in a cave with bears is an alternative lifestyle. Who I love is not a lifestyle.

Whether or not you are for gay marriage is not the issue. The issue is the rights that come with a marriage license. Gays (or straights) don't have to get married in a church. And even if gay marriage is illegal, gay people can and will still get married in churches. It has NOTHING to do with the religious institution of marriage, and EVERYTHING to do with the state and federal institution of marriage.

Secondly, would you deny black people the right to get married? They are a minority, and it was once illegal. How about interracial marriages? Another minority, and was once illegal. Would you support the ban of American Sign Language, the language used by the Deaf? Because they are a minority, and were once not allowed to use their own language. Rewind a couple hundred years: Look at those native americans over there doing a spirit dance-- they look nuts! They're a majority, but let's kill em all anyway.

To deny rights to anyone is NOT OK. Its been done in the past to many groups of people, many minorities, and it is still being done. In the 21st century. In America. Freakin' South Africa recognizes gay marriages.

There was a time when it was illegal for blacks to marry whites. When it was finally done away with, there were parents shielding their children's eyes from the danger of seeing an interracial couple. There were people that thought it was the end of society, the downfall of America, and the destruction of the institution of marriage. But its not. Everything is still fine. And its the same with gay marriage. It isn't going to change YOU or YOUR LIFE if I get married to my partner. And you clearly DO have something against homosexuals as you are so quick to deny rights to them.

Marriage between a man and a woman is also not the foundation of society. In ancient times, men married men, women married women, men married women and had boys to screw around with, etc etc. The idea that marriage should be strictly between a man and a woman is, in the grand scheme of history and time, a new idea.

If you're against gay marriage as a religious institution, more power to you. But you MUST separate the religious institution of marriage from the state and federal marriage license. They are different, and do and mean completely different things.

There is so much wrong in the world... with all the hate in the world, why should we be condemned because of who we love?

I know not everyone agrees, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I certainly don't hold it against anyone! I have a very good friend who loves me as a friend, but does not "agree" with my "lifestyle", and hey that is their view and why should I not be friends with them for it? But these are simply my beliefs.

jillio · 03-05-2009, 09:56 PM

^^

dogmom · 03-06-2009, 08:32 AM

Agree, too pathymo and Jillio!

I am bi and in monogomous relationship with male - but I could have gone either way. All those who know me know I'm bi <including my folks and my husband> and are more or less accepting. I have experienced prejudicial belief from both straight and gay/lesbian communities. I agree wholeheartedly - take religion out! One person's < or some group's> spirituality or religion should not be legislated to the whole! Issue of civil rights as well as separation of church and state.

lsfoster · 03-06-2009, 09:55 AM

Good post, pathymo.

Anyone else following the hearings in SF lately? I'm getting nervous. The whole thing kind of makes me want to throw up...

jillio · 03-06-2009, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsfoster

Good post, pathymo.

Anyone else following the hearings in SF lately? I'm getting nervous. The whole thing kind of makes me want to throw up...

I've been following it, and I agree. It is cause for grave concern.

jillio · 03-06-2009, 11:58 AM

Economy enters same-sex marriage debate - CNN.com

Berry · 03-07-2009, 07:07 AM

Well if I have learned anything in my life time it is that morals and values are for sale and that politicians are the biggest prostitutes of all. Politics is a game played for power and money is the Mad Queen.

There are rumors out here in California that legalizing, and taxing, marijuana, prostitution, and gambling, is seen as a possible way out of the money crises -- And are being considered.

Show them gay marriage can turn a profit or save a bundle and prop 8 won't stand a chance.

jillio · 03-07-2009, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berry

Well if I have learned anything in my life time it is that morals and values are for sale and that politicians are the biggest prostitutes of all. Politics is a game played for power and money is the Mad Queen.

There are rumors out here in California that legalizing, and taxing, marijuana, prostitution, and gambling, is seen as a possible way out of the money crises -- And are being considered.

Show them gay marriage can turn a profit or save a bundle and prop 8 won't stand a chance.

Exactly. A shame that there is a price on morals.

**Maria** · 03-08-2009, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsfoster

Good post, pathymo.

Anyone else following the hearings in SF lately? I'm getting nervous. The whole thing kind of makes me want to throw up...

Care to share why you are gettin' nervous ? What's it all about, if you don't mind me askin' ?

lsfoster · 03-08-2009, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria

Care to share why you are gettin' nervous ? What's it all about, if you don't mind me askin' ?

Currently the CA courts are starting hearings to decide whether or not to overturn Prop 8. I'm getting nervous because usually with hearings like this, they try to predict how each judge will vote based on the questions they ask at the hearings. Right now, it sounds like the majority of judges are going to vote to let Prop 8 stand, and are trying to decide what to do with the 18,000 couples who had gotten married before the vote. So I'm nervous

**Foxrac** · 03-08-2009, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsfoster

Currently the CA courts are starting hearings to decide whether or not to overturn Prop 8. I'm getting nervous because usually with hearings like this, they try to predict how each judge will vote based on the questions they ask at the hearings. Right now, it sounds like the majority of judges are going to vote to let Prop 8 stand, and are trying to decide what to do with the 18,000 couples who had gotten married before the vote. So I'm nervous

Does judge can take away or void the marriage license for 18,000 couples that got marriage license in last year?

lsfoster · 03-08-2009, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxrac

Does judge can take away or void the marriage license for 18,000 couples that got marriage license in last year?

The short answer is: yes. They completely have the power to do that. It doesn't sound like they want to, which is good, but also tricky. The judges don't want to invalidate all those marriages, but if they pass Prop 8, they will be putting into the state constitution that marriage can only be defined as between a man and a woman, which would be hard to do while leaving those marriages safe.

**Maria** · 03-09-2009, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsfoster

Currently the CA courts are starting hearings to decide whether or not to overturn Prop 8. I'm getting nervous because usually with hearings like this, they try to predict how each judge will vote based on the questions they ask at the hearings. Right now, it sounds like the majority of judges are going to vote to let Prop 8 stand, and are trying to decide what to do with the 18,000 couples who had gotten married before the vote. So I'm nervous

I see, okay. Umm, I am sure some people don't want see Constitution bein' attack. That Constitution is all about morality and religion for people who stand their values and keep that way.

Isfoster, I know there's one thing that's funny to some people who don't feel it is a proper way to marry the same sex from the church or pastor/priest -- because, that's like God is marryin' to the same sex couples WHILE He is Holy, you know ? Umm... it's not right to some people who perspect it. God is not a homosexual and that He okay it. That's not how it works. THAT is the problem. Marriage is belonged to God for a man and woman that He gave, not the same sex people, because of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were the opposite sex, not same sex. THAT picture should give to some people to recognize when Adam and Eve were first created on earth. That's the custom/traditional for centuries/decades. The foundin' fathers already recognized it and that was how the Constitution was made.

Church and state will always stay separate.

lsfoster · 03-09-2009, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria

I see, okay. Umm, I am sure some people don't want see Constitution bein' attack. That Constitution is all about morality and religion for people who stand their values and keep that way.

Isfoster, I know there's one thing that's funny to some people who don't feel it is a proper way to marry the same sex from the church or pastor/priest -- because, that's like God is marryin' to the same sex couples WHILE He is Holy, you know ? Umm... it's not right to some people who perspect it. God is not a homosexual and that He okay it. That's not how it works. THAT is the problem. Marriage is belonged to God for a man and woman that He gave, not the same sex people, because of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were the opposite sex, not same sex. THAT picture should give to some people to recognize when Adam and Eve were first created on earth. That's the custom/traditional for centuries/decades. The foundin' fathers already recognized it and that was how the Constitution was made.

Church and state will always stay separate.

I'd rather not get into a religious discussion which will just get the thread locked, but if you're actually interested in this issue, I'd be more than happy to continue over pm's.

All I'll say here is that the argument you are presenting does not keep church and state separate. A marriage ceremony and a marriage certificate are two very different things. To restrict one part of the population from obtaining a legal certificate because of religious views (which I'd be happy to discuss elsewhere), is doing the exact opposite of separating church and state. If you personally, or your church didn't want to perform a marriage ceremony, no law would make them. Right now, if I wanted to have a church perform a ceremony for me and my girlfriend, they are absolutely allowed to. The issue is whether or not the government will give us the little piece of paper that carries all the rights and recognition on the legal side of things. And whether or not they do that should have absolutely nothing to do with anyone's religious beliefs. It would be like saying that we shouldn't be allowed to get driver's licenses because some people are Amish and their religion leads them to avoid modern technologies. Their beliefs aren't supposed to affect the laws for everyone else. That's the point of keeping church and state separate.

**Maria** · 03-09-2009, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsfoster

I'd rather not get into a religious discussion which will just get the thread locked, but if you're actually interested in this issue, I'd be more than happy to continue over pm's.

Okay, we can discuss this matter in PMLand.

All I'll say here is that the argument you are presenting does not keep church and state separate. A marriage ceremony and a marriage certificate are two very different things. To restrict one part of the population from obtaining a legal certificate because of religious views (which I'd be happy to discuss elsewhere), is doing the exact opposite of separating church and state. If you personally, or your church didn't want to perform a marriage ceremony, no law would make them. Right now, if I wanted to have a church perform a ceremony for me and my girlfriend, they are absolutely allowed to. The issue is whether or not the government will give us the little piece of paper that carries all the rights and recognition on the legal side of things. And whether or not they do that should have absolutely nothing to do with anyone's religious beliefs. It would be like saying that we shouldn't be allowed to get driver's licenses because some people are Amish and their religion leads them to avoid modern technologies. Their beliefs aren't supposed to affect the laws for everyone else. That's the point of keeping church and state separate.

I am not exactly sure, if I completely understand the means of marriage ceremony AND marriage certificate .....

That " marriage ceremony " is a new to me, but I do know what the " marriage certificate " is. Don't you mind to explain a little bit about marriage ceremony ? I find it very interestin'.

**Jiro** · 03-09-2009, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria

I am not exactly sure, if I completely understand the means of marriage ceremony AND marriage certificate .....

That " marriage ceremony " is a new to me, but I do know what the " marriage certificate " is. Don't you mind to explain a little bit about marriage ceremony ? I find it very interestin'.

marriage ceremony is just a wedding party between you/hubby and the families/friends. marriage certificate is the official recognition by government.

**Maria** · 03-09-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

marriage ceremony is just a wedding party between you/hubby and the families/friends. marriage certificate is the official recognition by government.

Ahhh - I gotcha now. So, supposely if, I decide wanna a marriage ceremony -- am I require to have a marriage certificate through a pastor/priest ? Or it is not necessary because, of families/friends are witnesses to marriage ceremony ?

Can I ask a pastor/priest to perform us without marriage certificate in church ? I am not sure, if that is required.

My fiance prefers marriage ceremony. He thinks the government is full of crap over the piece of paper. He prefers "witnesses" and that's good enough.

I am learnin'.

**Foxrac** · 03-09-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria

I am not exactly sure, if I completely understand the means of marriage ceremony AND marriage certificate .....

That " marriage ceremony " is a new to me, but I do know what the " marriage certificate " is. Don't you mind to explain a little bit about marriage ceremony ? I find it very interestin'.

Your post is very interesting about religious stuff that based on marriage.

I would like to discuss via PM too.

I'm Christian too, no longer to be atheist or non-religion anymore.

pathymo · 03-11-2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maria

Ahhh - I gotcha now. So, supposely if, I decide wanna a marriage ceremony -- am I require to have a marriage certificate through a pastor/priest ? Or it is not necessary because, of families/friends are witnesses to marriage ceremony ?

Can I ask a pastor/priest to perform us without marriage certificate in church ? I am not sure, if that is required.

My fiance prefers marriage ceremony. He thinks the government is full of crap over the piece of paper. He prefers "witnesses" and that's good enough.

I am learnin'.

In order for a married couple to have federal rights AS a married couple, they must be issued a marriage certificate by the State.

A couple can get married in a church and not get a marriage certificate (though this doesn't really make a lot of sense, and I am assuming it is probably rare).

A couple can also go down to a court house and sign a marriage certificate. They then are recognized by the federal government as being "married" and receive federal rights.

Gay people can go into a church that performs gay marriages and get married. That never has been, and never will be the issue (though that's what the crazy conservatives would have you believe). However, gay people cannot go to a court house and get a marriage certificate from the State (unless you are in Massachusetts or Connecticut), and therefore do not receive the state rights that come with being married. This is wrong.

What is even MORE wrong is that unless DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) is overturned (gooooood luck), gay couples who DO have a marriage license from the State (Mass. or Conn.) will STILL not be recognized as married by the Federal Government. They will have State rights, but not Federal rights.

Hope this all makes sense.

Oh, and just for fun.....

If God had meant for man to smoke, he would have made Adam and Weed.
If God had meant for people to have fake hair, he would have made Adam and Weave
If God had meant for Superman to be here, he would have created Adam and Reeves
If God had meant for there to be swords, he would have created Adam and Sheaths
If God had meant for Jerry Mathers to have a career, he would have created Adam and The Beav.

lsfoster · 03-14-2009, 03:44 PM

I'm just too lazy to write this all out again, but in case people missed it (or just forgot), I already covered why there is really no question that it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. I still haven't heard any good responses to that argument, but I'll keep waiting.

California Proposition Eight - Ban on Same-Sex Marriage

Bindz · 04-30-2009, 05:00 PM

I didn't read the whole thread but here are my thoughts on this...

I am 100% in favor of gay marriage, this whole "separate but equal" scenario didn't work during Jim Crow and most definitely won't work today. There is a group of people that suggest and feel that their religious scriptures should speak on behalf of everyone and I couldn't disagree more.

You can believe what you want and how you want to, I just don't understand the logic in trying to prevent other groups of people from marrying just because your religion dictates so. For instance, I may not be a fan of propeller hats but how I overcome this is by not wearing propeller hats, I don't go out of my way to prevent everone else from wearing such hats just because I feel it's 'bad'

...and besides, the origins of marriage were never sacred to begin with, in other words, religion just adopted marriage...not create it....marriage (if we're going to define it by it's origins) was more about property values and lines of succession, not love as it's looked upon today

dogmom · 04-30-2009, 05:03 PM

Bindz, I agree with you.....

**shel90** · 04-30-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bindz

I didn't read the whole thread but here are my thoughts on this...

I am 100% in favor of gay marriage, this whole "separate but equal" scenario didn't work during Jim Crow and most definitely won't work today. There is a group of people that suggest and feel that their religious scriptures should speak on behalf of everyone and I couldn't disagree more.

You can believe what you want and how you want to, I just don't understand the logic in trying to prevent other groups of people from marrying just because your religion dictates so. For instance, I may not be a fan of propeller hats but how I overcome this is by not wearing propeller hats, I don't go out of my way to prevent everone else from wearing such hats just because I feel it's 'bad'

...and besides, the origins of marriage were never sacred to begin with, in other words, religion just adopted marriage...not create it....marriage (if we're going to define it by it's origins) was more about property values and lines of succession, not love as it's looked upon today

Lighthouse77 · 04-30-2009, 08:02 PM

I have two aunts who raised my cousin together. They deserved the same rights but without the term marriage (they certainly do not want people think they are in love)

The bible talks about marriage all the time. So marriage between a man and a woman is very important to me. I can not acknowledge marriage between same sex. Nor I like the gov't forcing me to knowledge it.

I'm ok with the term "civil union" in a gov't setting for everyone. But I just can not tell my kids they are married when I don't knowledge it.

View Poll Results: Which you would choice?
Same-sex Marriage	35	53.85%
Civil Union	19	29.23%
No answer or other	11	16.92%
Voters: 65. You may not vote on this poll

03-05-2009, 09:37 PM	#362 (permalink)
pathymo Registered User Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 61	Long read.... A long read, but here is my response! I posted this on another forum I belong to, and is relevant here. Naturally, as a gay man I am against Proposition 8. I do not believe that discrimination should be written into any constitution, state or federal. I also believe on a state and federal level, gay marriages should be recognized. This does not mean that I believe a Church should legally have to marry gay people. I believe this is where the line is blurred. Gay marriage is not about gay people walking into a religious institution and getting married. The fact of the matter is, gay people getting married in churches will happen whether or not it is 'legal'. The issue at hand is a marriage license not being granted or recognized by the state, and gay people not getting equal legal rights that come with a state recognized marriage license. It has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with equal rights under the law. Unfortunately, even if states recognize gay marriages, because of President Clinton's stupid decision to sign the DOMA the marriage will still not be federally recognized. So a gay couple who is legally married (in CT or MA) can file jointly for state taxes, but not federal taxes. And there are of course no kinds of federal protection under the law. Really what should happen is that the title of "marriage license" should be changed. That way, everyone goes to a court house to get a "Civil Union License" or "Yipa doo da License", and then those people are recognized under the law as a Union and are therefore granted certain rights under the law. Then if people choose to do so, they can go to a Church and get married. And one side note, after reading some past posts...... parents cannot shield their children from the world. Sorry, it can't happen. Growing up, I knew I was gay. From a very young age I knew I liked boys, not girls. My parents didn't have to teach me about an "alternative lifestyle" for me to know what I wanted. Also, at least in my school, my parents had to sign a paper saying it was ok for me to attend sex ed class when we had to learn about that. If the parents didn't sign the paper, the kid didn't have to go. No reason that couldn't be done again. But I digress.... If a kid is going to be gay, the kid is going to be gay. What is damaging to the child is not to nurture or discuss these kinds of feelings, but to condemn these feelings. The highest rate of suicide is among LGBT teenagers. Why? Because they're constantly told it is wrong, disgusting, against God, against this against that, yadda yadda yadda. Couple that with the fact that you can't get married, there are people who want to kill you for who you are, and God doesn't love you anymore. Not much reason to live..... I'm extremely fortunate for my family. I was never told I was less than human, that I was disgusting, CHOOSING to "act" on unnatural feelings. When I came out at 15, my parents said "ok, we want you to be happy, safe, healthy... if this is who you are, we don't love you any less and we are here to love and support you". To think I was ever afraid to come out to them.... but many kids are, because of how their parents talk about the issue, how society views the issue. That its an "alternative lifestyle".... uh, no. Living out in the woods in a cave with bears is an alternative lifestyle. Who I love is not a lifestyle. Whether or not you are for gay marriage is not the issue. The issue is the rights that come with a marriage license. Gays (or straights) don't have to get married in a church. And even if gay marriage is illegal, gay people can and will still get married in churches. It has NOTHING to do with the religious institution of marriage, and EVERYTHING to do with the state and federal institution of marriage. Secondly, would you deny black people the right to get married? They are a minority, and it was once illegal. How about interracial marriages? Another minority, and was once illegal. Would you support the ban of American Sign Language, the language used by the Deaf? Because they are a minority, and were once not allowed to use their own language. Rewind a couple hundred years: Look at those native americans over there doing a spirit dance-- they look nuts! They're a majority, but let's kill em all anyway. To deny rights to anyone is NOT OK. Its been done in the past to many groups of people, many minorities, and it is still being done. In the 21st century. In America. Freakin' South Africa recognizes gay marriages. There was a time when it was illegal for blacks to marry whites. When it was finally done away with, there were parents shielding their children's eyes from the danger of seeing an interracial couple. There were people that thought it was the end of society, the downfall of America, and the destruction of the institution of marriage. But its not. Everything is still fine. And its the same with gay marriage. It isn't going to change YOU or YOUR LIFE if I get married to my partner. And you clearly DO have something against homosexuals as you are so quick to deny rights to them. Marriage between a man and a woman is also not the foundation of society. In ancient times, men married men, women married women, men married women and had boys to screw around with, etc etc. The idea that marriage should be strictly between a man and a woman is, in the grand scheme of history and time, a new idea. If you're against gay marriage as a religious institution, more power to you. But you MUST separate the religious institution of marriage from the state and federal marriage license. They are different, and do and mean completely different things. There is so much wrong in the world... with all the hate in the world, why should we be condemned because of who we love? I know not everyone agrees, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I certainly don't hold it against anyone! I have a very good friend who loves me as a friend, but does not "agree" with my "lifestyle", and hey that is their view and why should I not be friends with them for it? But these are simply my beliefs.

03-06-2009, 09:55 AM	#365 (permalink)
lsfoster Registered User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Boston Posts: 432	Good post, pathymo. Anyone else following the hearings in SF lately? I'm getting nervous. The whole thing kind of makes me want to throw up... __________________ "Voici mon secret. Il est très simple: on ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux."

03-07-2009, 07:07 AM	#368 (permalink)
Berry Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Oroville, Ca. Posts: 2,024	Well if I have learned anything in my life time it is that morals and values are for sale and that politicians are the biggest prostitutes of all. Politics is a game played for power and money is the Mad Queen. There are rumors out here in California that legalizing, and taxing, marijuana, prostitution, and gambling, is seen as a possible way out of the money crises -- And are being considered. Show them gay marriage can turn a profit or save a bundle and prop 8 won't stand a chance. __________________ Free Jillio! Living life in the sandbox.

03-14-2009, 03:44 PM	#381 (permalink)
lsfoster Registered User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Boston Posts: 432	I'm just too lazy to write this all out again, but in case people missed it (or just forgot), I already covered why there is really no question that it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. I still haven't heard any good responses to that argument, but I'll keep waiting. California Proposition Eight - Ban on Same-Sex Marriage __________________ "Voici mon secret. Il est très simple: on ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux."

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

03-05-2009, 09:56 PM	#363 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 60,296	^^

03-06-2009, 08:32 AM	#364 (permalink)
dogmom Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 5,472	Agree, too pathymo and Jillio! I am bi and in monogomous relationship with male - but I could have gone either way. All those who know me know I'm bi <including my folks and my husband> and are more or less accepting. I have experienced prejudicial belief from both straight and gay/lesbian communities. I agree wholeheartedly - take religion out! One person's < or some group's> spirituality or religion should not be legislated to the whole! Issue of civil rights as well as separation of church and state.

03-06-2009, 11:58 AM	#367 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 60,296	Economy enters same-sex marriage debate - CNN.com

04-30-2009, 05:00 PM	#382 (permalink)
Bindz Registered User Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 16	I didn't read the whole thread but here are my thoughts on this... I am 100% in favor of gay marriage, this whole "separate but equal" scenario didn't work during Jim Crow and most definitely won't work today. There is a group of people that suggest and feel that their religious scriptures should speak on behalf of everyone and I couldn't disagree more. You can believe what you want and how you want to, I just don't understand the logic in trying to prevent other groups of people from marrying just because your religion dictates so. For instance, I may not be a fan of propeller hats but how I overcome this is by *not wearing propeller hats, I don't go out of my way to prevent everone else* from wearing such hats just because I feel it's 'bad' ...and besides, the origins of marriage were never sacred to begin with, in other words, religion just adopted marriage...not create it....marriage (if we're going to define it by it's origins) was more about property values and lines of succession, not love as it's looked upon today

04-30-2009, 05:03 PM	#383 (permalink)
dogmom Registered User Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 5,472	Bindz, I agree with you.....

04-30-2009, 08:02 PM	#385 (permalink)
Lighthouse77 Registered User Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 4,167	I have two aunts who raised my cousin together. They deserved the same rights but without the term marriage (they certainly do not want people think they are in love) The bible talks about marriage all the time. So marriage between a man and a woman is very important to me. I can not acknowledge marriage between same sex. Nor I like the gov't forcing me to knowledge it. I'm ok with the term "civil union" in a gov't setting for everyone. But I just can not tell my kids they are married when I don't knowledge it. __________________ Good thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. Last edited by Lighthouse77; 04-30-2009 at 09:58 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode