Who is harmed by same-sex marriage?

[Tekania]

Just like when I'm discussing East African immigration in my community, I always make sure to send an invite to the Klan.

The Klan isn't directly involved with immigration. The church is directly involved in marriage. Don't change the subject

The church isn't directly involved, it's indirectly involved. The civil government simply allowes ordained clergy to officiate in marriage documents, but their capacity is purely within the confines of the state and more directly the persons marrying. Anyone who is authorized to officiate by the state can precide, it doesn't have to be a church.

[Tekania]

Or else we'll... tell you you're wrong.

Oh no.

Reminds me of people whining about "militant atheists".

Well, as a Christian I've been classed a militant atheist before..... which really shows you how devalued the phrase is. The phrase seems to carry the meaning of "oh, you don't want to walk lock step while we turn the nation into a theocratic hell hole", really. It's neither militant nor atheist.

[Tekania]

My stances:

ANTI Gay Marriage

ANTI Gay Adoption

PRO Civil Unions


Let the hate continue...

Marriage in the US is a civil operation of union... therefore pro civil union is pro gay-marriage since the terms are really the same in the context of how the US operates marriage. I'm frankly a bit tired of the false dichotomy between "civil union" and "gay-marriage" in this.... it's intellectually dishonest.

[Condunum]

Reminds me of people whining about "militant atheists".

Well, as a Christian I've been classed a militant atheist before..... which really shows you how devalued the phrase is. The phrase seems to carry the meaning of "oh, you don't want to walk lock step while we turn the nation into a theocratic hell hole", really. It's neither militant nor atheist.

Freethinkers are obviously a cancer on society.

[Lamaredia]

Well, as a Christian I've been classed a militant atheist before..... which really shows you how devalued the phrase is. The phrase seems to carry the meaning of "oh, you don't want to walk lock step while we turn the nation into a theocratic hell hole", really. It's neither militant nor atheist.

Freethinkers are obviously a cancer on society.

Obviously.

[Ashmoria]

(Image)

(Image)

Okay... So what are your thoughts on gay marriage? Please give a reason why you think it should be legal, or why you think it shouldn't be.

Personal Opinion: Legalizing gay marriage is not a great idea. I mean, America is a role model for many nations in the world, and it will be sort of morally inappropriate to legalize gay marriage in America.

It seems to be to be a great role model for the rest of the world (except that it has taken us longer than so many other countries). it might even make those Ugandan politicians stop and think about the advice they are getting from US preachers about gay rights.

you never know.

[Lamaredia]

(Image)

(Image)

Okay... So what are your thoughts on gay marriage? Please give a reason why you think it should be legal, or why you think it shouldn't be.

Personal Opinion: Legalizing gay marriage is not a great idea. I mean, America is a role model for many nations in the world, and it will be sort of morally inappropriate to legalize gay marriage in America.

Role model? Once again,

BULLSHIT

America is anything but a role model for nations. If anything, it should strive to be more like more progressive countries like Canada, Sweden or Denmark.

[Northern Dominus]

My stances:

ANTI Gay Marriage

ANTI Gay Adoption

PRO Civil Unions


Let the hate continue...

See here's the thing. Your stances don't matter. Your crummy little faith doesn't matter. When it comes to seperate but equal and civil rights, you don't matter.

The only thing that matters is that LGBT human beings are denied fundamental and federal rights for no reason other than certain fundamentalist religious bigots with too much money and time and too little sense or compassion feel icky while feeling about it, which violates the highest law in the land.

(Image)

(Image)

Okay... So what are your thoughts on gay marriage? Please give a reason why you think it should be legal, or why you think it shouldn't be.
Personal Opinion: Legalizing gay marriage is not a great idea. I mean, America is a role model for many nations in the world, and it will be sort of morally inappropriate to legalize gay marriage in America.

See above. Your fundamental rights are not being denied to you because certain people are bigots and over-represented in certain governmental functions, so your personal opinion doesn't matter either.

[Grave_n_idle]

Personal Opinion: Legalizing gay marriage is not a great idea. I mean, America is a role model for many nations in the world, and it will be sort of morally inappropriate to legalize gay marriage in America.

It's 'sort of morally inappropriate' to treat a legal institution differently for different people, especially when the Constitution explicitly says we shouldn't.

[Agymnum]

My stances:

ANTI Gay Marriage

ANTI Gay Adoption

PRO Civil Unions


Let the hate continue...

See here's the thing. Your stances don't matter. Your crummy little faith doesn't matter. When it comes to seperate but equal and civil rights, you don't matter.

The only thing that matters is that LGBT human beings are denied fundamental and federal rights for no reason other than certain fundamentalist religious bigots with too much money and time and too little sense or compassion feel icky while feeling about it, which violates the highest law in the land.

Realistically, he does matter. It's because of him and his anti-gay marriage and adoption block that same-sex couples are denied fundamental rights that are bestowed on all other US citizens.

I mean, really, if no one was opposed to same-sex marriage, would we be arguing over its legality? Of course not, because it would be legal and no one would shake two shits at it.

[The Steel Magnolia]

(Image)

(Image)

Okay... So what are your thoughts on gay marriage? Please give a reason why you think it should be legal, or why you think it shouldn't be.

Personal Opinion: Legalizing gay marriage is not a great idea. I mean, America is a role model for many nations in the world, and it will be sort of morally inappropriate to legalize gay marriage in America.

Role model? Once again,

BULLSHIT

America is anything but a role model for nations. If anything, it should strive to be more like more progressive countries like Canada, Sweden or Denmark.

Oh please.

[Northern Dominus]

See here's the thing. Your stances don't matter. Your crummy little faith doesn't matter. When it comes to seperate but equal and civil rights, you don't matter.

The only thing that matters is that LGBT human beings are denied fundamental and federal rights for no reason other than certain fundamentalist religious bigots with too much money and time and too little sense or compassion feel icky while feeling about it, which violates the highest law in the land.

Realistically, he does matter. It's because of him and his anti-gay marriage and adoption block that same-sex couples are denied fundamental rights that are bestowed on all other US citizens.

I mean, really, if no one was opposed to same-sex marriage, would we be arguing over its legality? Of course not, because it would be legal and no one would shake two shits at it.

But it's a false relevance. His personal opinions and little ideas should have been crushed under the weight of this injustice being done to human beings a long time ago.

People have the right to their opinions and views, I get that and respect that. What they don't have the right to do is use those opinions and views to fuck over other people for no reason other than their personal perverse predilections.

[Grave_n_idle]

..and gay marriage is wrong how

Marriage is a pillar of society and for hundreds of years, it has been defined as between a man and a woman and allowing Gays and Lesbians to marry is redefining this important part of society.

Marriage, exactly as it is right now... isn't even the same as it as thirty years ago.

It's been a constantly evolving institution - we 'redefine it' (make it better) all the time.

[Norstal]

(Image)

(Image)

Okay... So what are your thoughts on gay marriage? Please give a reason why you think it should be legal, or why you think it shouldn't be.

Personal Opinion: Legalizing gay marriage is not a great idea. I mean, America is a role model for many nations in the world, and it will be sort of morally inappropriate to legalize gay marriage in America.

Role model? Once again,

BULLSHIT

America is anything but a role model for nations. If anything, it should strive to be more like more progressive countries like Canada, Sweden or Denmark.

[Salandriagado]

IT'S NOT WHAT GOD WANTS US TO DO! END OF STORY!!!!!

Source please. Then tell me why it's relevant.

I have a hard time picking sides because I don't have respect for either side. Both sides are very self-centric. Pro-gay groups don't try to understand the moral commitments of traditional Christians who feel as if their way of life is at risk. Traditional Christians don't attempt to walk in the shoes of a homosexual couple who can't be married. Traditional Christians also don't offer lenience toward practitioners of homosexuality, which being a sin can be forgiven by god like any other sin.

We entirely understand what these supposed "traditional Christians" (and I strongly disagree with your abuse of the word "traditional" here) want. We just don't give a flying fuck, because their beliefs are completely and utterly irrelevant.

How about we just let same sex couples get married but keep the church out of it?

A good idea. But I doubt anyone could keep government from forcing churches to marry homosexual couples. If the government can force churches to pay contraception against their beliefs who knows what else they can do involving forcing churches to do things.

There is literally no possibility of any church being forced to marry anybody to anybody. There are churches that still refuse to marry mixed-race couples, for fucks sake.

That's because there's no need to understand how traditional Christians feel. They're irrelevant.

I'm not a very traditional Christian at all, but I don't think it's very decent or intelligent to not include a faction that is DIRECTLY involved in opposition to gay marriage.

Their rights are perfectly dealt with: they have every right to not marry somebody of the same gender as them. They do not have the right to force their bullshit on everybody else.

I suppose the best solution in an advanced modern country is simply to abolish the government recognition of marriage altogether, and simply have 'registered partnerships' between any two individuals. If you want to do yours in a church and call it a 'marriage', that's your business in your private club, not anybody else's.

We already have a word for a government-recognised partnership between individuals. It's called "marriage".

They're about as relevant as creationists debating evolution, or racists debating segregation. Religious beliefs have no place in the government, especially when they discriminate against entire sections of the population.

The point is this is a law that many feel pertains to their religious beliefs.

No it isn't. It is a law that pertains to giving equal recognition under a purely governmental system to individuals regardless of sexual orientation, that some bigots oppose due to bigotry.

Just like when I'm discussing East African immigration in my community, I always make sure to send an invite to the Klan.

The Klan isn't directly involved with immigration. The church is directly involved in marriage. Don't change the subject

Churches are in no way involved in marriage.

You mean a marriage?

The term "marriage" used in everyday parlance is loaded with a lot of philosophical baggage. In the officialdom, however, a marriage is basically a quasi-contract entered into by two individuals binding them into a set of mutual legal obligations. My system simply strips out the superfluous bollocks and allows you to interpret your formalised relationship with your significant other however you want, in accordance with your personal philosophies.

If you're religious, believe in a certain religion's definition of marriage, then by all means do your registration in a church and call it a marriage. Whatever floats your boat in your private club. Everybody is entitled to act according to their particular individual belief system. Everybody wins.

"Marriage" has always been a system of resolving certain legal rights and obligations into one easy package. That is exactly and precisely what it has always meant. Originally, it was property rights, but now it's picked up a few extra ones.

So you're comparing the stealing of land without consultation, to the the stealing of nothing and harming of no one?

But my analogy was ridiculous?

No, the point of my analogy was the absence of a major faction in a major decision involving them. Whether you disagree or not marriage is a major part of Christianity, and not including a major faction in an argument is anti-democratic and ignorant. Christian opposition has a right to argue and be heard, homosexuals also have a right to argue and be heard. I can't believe that people on this forum would be so prejudiced against one side or another as to not even acknowledge it.

They have the right to speak. They do not have the right for anybody else to listen to their bullshit. Because this is not a fucking theocracy. "Marriage" is not, and has never been, unique to religion of any kind, and certainly not Christianity, or your particular variant of it.

Your church doesn't own the word marriage sweetie. Unless you're saying that atheists aren't really married?

It's not "my church" i believe in god but i don't attend a church. I would say my argument is centrist, Christians are relevant in this argument because they make up a very large proportion of the USA (the country i have been referring to) and the legalization of gay marriage goes against their religious convictions, homosexuals are arguably more closely involved because this impacts whether they can be married. My personal belief as previously stated is that this should remain a state decision due to different concentrations of conservative Christians in different areas of the USA. Also I have no problem with atheists. I never said I think that atheists aren't married.

When one side is arguing equality, and the other is arguing bigotry, there is no "centrist" position. Their religion has literally nothing to do with the state institution of marriage, and is in no way affected by it. They are singularly irrelevant. They are exactly as irrelevant as those that argued against inter-racial marriage for the same basic reasons.

..and gay marriage is wrong how

Marriage is a pillar of society and for hundreds of years, it has been defined as between a man and a woman and allowing Gays and Lesbians to marry is redefining this important part of society.

No. Marriage has been, for the thousands of years that it has existed, a legal contract for dealing with things like property rights. It has been, and is, defined in many different ways in many different places. Your particular religion, or religion in general, does not have a monopoly on marriage, or even any significant stake in it.

[Liriena]

IT'S NOT WHAT GOD WANTS US TO DO! END OF STORY!!!!!

How mature of you.

[Grenartia]

If children see homosexual relations in society, they will also become homosexual.

Got a peer-reviewed, scientifically valid source for that bullshit?

And then you need to demonstrate that homosexuality is inherently bad, even if you could prove the above claim.

Even if that happened, it would not be harmful.

Well, if things happened like in his world, it could be argued to be harmful since it could cause human extinction if everyone turned homosexual...

Except, you know, in vitro fertilization, surrogacy, etc.

1. 10 Reasons Why Homosexual “Marriage” is Harmful and Must be Opposed.
http://www.tfpstudentaction.org/politic ... posed.html

2. And if you all gays would still don't care , I want just say to you all that I don't like homosexuality it is disgusting to me.

3. But still what the fu*k I can know, I am only 16 years old and I live in the world most anti gay, conservative country.

1. Biased source, easily refutable. I can actually do that for you, if you want. Every single point your link makes is filled with logical fallacies.

2. First off, just because one supports LGBT rights and equality, does not mean that they are automatically LGBT themselves.

3. Yes, because being 16, homophobic, and living in a homophobic area really gives you an accurate perspective on being LGBT.

Maybe instead of judging us, you should walk a few miles in our shoes first.

I HAVE YET TO UNDERSTAND HOW SAME-SEX AND MARRIAGE CAN BE PUT TOGETHER. I BELIVE THE WRONG TERM IS BEING USED. IF ONE MUST HAVE A SAME SEX CIVIL UNION, THAN THAT IS PERFECTLY REASONABLE. HOWEVER MY INERPRETATION HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT MARRIAGE IS RESERVED AS A RELIGIOUS EVENT. OFTEN BEING PERFORMED IN A CHURCH. WHICH DOES NOT RECOGNIZE HOMO SEXUALITY AS AN ACCEPTABLE WAY TO LIVE LIFE CLOSE TO GOD, AS STATED IN THE BIBLE.

Did your caps lock break?

And thats not even mentioning the things that are factually wrong with the post.

[Benuty]

If children see homosexual relations in society, they will also become homosexual. (The homosexuality becomes a model of society).

Are you a sociologist or for that matter a psychologist?

I think not, so source this stuff.

[Luveria]

If children see homosexual relations in society, they will also become homosexual. (The homosexuality becomes a model of society).

If homosexual children see heterosexual relations in society, they will also become heterosexual. (The heterosexuality becomes a model of society).

[Lessnt]

See here's the thing. Your stances don't matter. Your crummy little faith doesn't matter. When it comes to seperate but equal and civil rights, you don't matter.

The only thing that matters is that LGBT human beings are denied fundamental and federal rights for no reason other than certain fundamentalist religious bigots with too much money and time and too little sense or compassion feel icky while feeling about it, which violates the highest law in the land.

Realistically, he does matter. It's because of him and his anti-gay marriage and adoption block that same-sex couples are denied fundamental rights that are bestowed on all other US citizens.

I mean, really, if no one was opposed to same-sex marriage, would we be arguing over its legality? Of course not, because it would be legal and no one would shake two shits at it.

same sex couples can marry.
But marriage is defined for a man and a woman.
And if you believe it is a fundamental right.
Then you believe getting married to more than 1 person is also a right.
Because it does not make sense to allow same sex marriages and not allow people to marry as many people as they please.

[Individuality-ness]

Realistically, he does matter. It's because of him and his anti-gay marriage and adoption block that same-sex couples are denied fundamental rights that are bestowed on all other US citizens.

I mean, really, if no one was opposed to same-sex marriage, would we be arguing over its legality? Of course not, because it would be legal and no one would shake two shits at it.

same sex couples can marry.
But marriage is defined for a man and a woman.
And if you believe it is a fundamental right.
Then you believe getting married to more than 1 person is also a right.
Because it does not make sense to allow same sex marriages and not allow people to marry as many people as they please.

It is? And we should legalize plural marriages next?

I don't see what you're arguing.

[Farnhamia]

Realistically, he does matter. It's because of him and his anti-gay marriage and adoption block that same-sex couples are denied fundamental rights that are bestowed on all other US citizens.

I mean, really, if no one was opposed to same-sex marriage, would we be arguing over its legality? Of course not, because it would be legal and no one would shake two shits at it.

same sex couples can marry.
But marriage is defined for a man and a woman.
And if you believe it is a fundamental right.
Then you believe getting married to more than 1 person is also a right.
Because it does not make sense to allow same sex marriages and not allow people to marry as many people as they please.

The one does not necessarily follow the other, but as long as the legalities of custody and property are worked out, who is harmed by multiple-person marriages?

[Lessnt]

same sex couples can marry.
But marriage is defined for a man and a woman.
And if you believe it is a fundamental right.
Then you believe getting married to more than 1 person is also a right.
Because it does not make sense to allow same sex marriages and not allow people to marry as many people as they please.

It is? And we should legalize plural marriages next?

I don't see what you're arguing.

NO it should all be done at the exact same time.
Legalized that is.

[Farnhamia]

It is? And we should legalize plural marriages next?

I don't see what you're arguing.

NO it should all be done at the exact same time.
Legalized that is.

All or nothing, eh? No, thanks.

[Individuality-ness]

It is? And we should legalize plural marriages next?

I don't see what you're arguing.

NO it should all be done at the exact same time.
Legalized that is.

Like we should have waited to grant the right of equal protection of the law until everyone agrees that women should get that too? No.