Scotland to legalize Gay Marriage

[Aeken]

Do you not care that you're essentially degrading minorities just because of their sexuality?

am I though?

Yes, because you are restricting them from being able to marry and receive the benefits of marriage.

[God Kefka]

but then it's not technically ''equal rights'''... that's an additional right you want to add that everyone can exercise.

Right now the rights are equal. Everyone has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, the gays have that right too. But changing the law so that everyone can marry a person of the same sex... it's technically not making things more equal; it's juts adding an extra legal right across the board.

How are they equal when you can only marry the opposite sex?

It's equal right now. Everyone (gay or not) has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex; that's not discrimination, it's an equal rights regime. Gays don't have one less right than everyone else...

[Thafoo]

We want the right to a marriage... in general. We want to marry who we love and we love our own sex.

but then it's not technically ''equal rights'''... that's an additional right you want to add that everyone can exercise.

Right now the rights are equal. Everyone has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, the gays have that right too. But changing the law so that everyone can marry a person of the same sex... it's technically not making things more equal; it's just adding an extra legal right across the board.

We're not equal in the sense that we marry who we wish, in regards to sex.

[God Kefka]

am I though?

Yes, because you are restricting them from being able to marry and receive the benefits of marriage.

they can marry though. The law doesn't ban them from marrying like everyone else... heterosexually.

[Thafoo]

Yes, because you are restricting them from being able to marry and receive the benefits of marriage.

they can marry though. The law doesn't ban them from marrying like everyone else... heterosexually.

But... we aren't heterosexuals.

[Wisconsin9]

How are they equal when you can only marry the opposite sex?

It's equal right now. Everyone (gay or not) has the right to marry someone of the opposite sex; that's not discrimination, it's an equal rights regime. Gays don't have one less right than everyone else...

Just like in thenforties everyone had the right to marry someone of the same race but that's it, and it certainly wasn't discrimination except oh wait yes it was.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

but then it's not technically ''equal rights'''... that's an additional right you want to add that everyone can exercise.

Right now the rights are equal. Everyone has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, the gays have that right too. But changing the law so that everyone can marry a person of the same sex... it's technically not making things more equal; it's just adding an extra legal right across the board.

We're not equal in the sense that we marry who we wish, in regards to sex.

■ Interracial marriages once were banned.

■ American women who married foreigners lost their citizenship and property at one time.

■ The U.S. government wouldn’t acknowledge Native American and Japanese marriages.

All of them were removed for being discriminatory. Can't see why ours wouldn't.

[Aeken]

Yes, because you are restricting them from being able to marry and receive the benefits of marriage.

they can marry though. The law doesn't ban them from marrying like everyone else... heterosexually.

But homosexuals don't want to marry the opposite sex. How hard is that to understand?

[God Kefka]

We're not equal in the sense that we marry who we wish, in regards to sex.

■ Interracial marriages once were banned.

■ American women who married foreigners lost their citizenship and property at one time.

■ The U.S. government wouldn’t acknowledge Native American and Japanese marriages.

All of them were removed for being discriminatory. Can't see why ours wouldn't.

It doesn't seem like discrimination though.

The law says in practice, ''everyone can marry a person of the opposite sex.'' It doesn't have any specific provisions specifically ordering a detriment against gays.

Now if the law said, ''everyone who is gay must pay X% more taxes'' then that would clearly be discrimination against gays.

But saying that the present marriage laws discriminate against gays like is saying that if a country only officially recognized a right to play soccer but says nothing about ping pong, a person who loves ping pong and hates soccer can stand up and say ''hey this country discriminates against ping pong!''

[Armed Union]

What does satire mean.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satire

Essentially, the image you posted, was actually pro-gay, and it was mocking anti-gay arguments.

I completely read that wrong! Haha that's funny. I'm such a fail.

[God Kefka]

they can marry though. The law doesn't ban them from marrying like everyone else... heterosexually.

But homosexuals don't want to marry the opposite sex. How hard is that to understand?

it doesn't make them unequal though...

the law is framed in equal terms. ''Everyone can do X...'' ''everyone can marry a person of the opposite sex.''

What the gays can't do the straight people can't do either...

[Thafoo]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satire

Essentially, the image you posted, was actually pro-gay, and it was mocking anti-gay arguments.

I completely read that wrong! Haha that's funny. I'm such a fail.

At least we can agree on one point...

[Annar]

Whatever happened to separation of church and state? Some people seem to be arguing that gay marriage should be illegal due to religion.

[Armed Union]

I completely read that wrong! Haha that's funny. I'm such a fail.

At least we can agree on one

[Thafoo]

At least we can agree on one point...

At least I don't agree with homosexuality. Why should I be embarrassed.

Are you implying I should be embarrassed for having and supporting a different sexual orientation?

[The Scientific States]

At least we can agree on one point...

At least I don't agree with homosexuality. Why should I be embarrassed.

At least you don't? Implying that's a good thing.

You've yet to provide us with any legitimate reasons as to why homosexuality is wrong, so I suggest reevaluating your stance on the issue.

[Margno]

Okay.

So why do you think gay marriage is wrong?

Because I'm a christian and I believe that marriage should be traditional as it used to be. Some reasons I have are, 1. Divorcee rates will go up. 2. Same sex marriage will destroy the institution of marriage. 3. It could POSSIBLY lead to marriage with animals and children. 4. Think of this would you want your own child to be homosexual. (If you don't have one just think about what you would think if you did).

No, those things won't happen.
1. Homosexual relationships can be just as committed and loving as traditional ones. Why do you think they want to get married? If people turned to homosexuality out of perversion, wouldn't they behave promiscuously, instead of fighting so hard to be able to publicly commit themselves to each other?
2. No, it affirms the institution of marriage. Marriage was always about committing to stay with one person who you could love deeply instead of having a long string of meaningless relationships, having children and providing for their welfare instead of abandoning them, having a constructive outlet for sexual desire instead of letting it turn into something destructive, and mutually helping each other. Homosexual relationships can do all of those things.
3. It couldn't lead to those things at all. Homosexual relationships are consensual and based on love and respect. Bestiality and pedophilia are based on violence and manipulation. How could loving relationships lead to those things?
4. You have to understand, a lot of people already accept homosexuality. More than half of the country supports gay marriage. If those people found out their children were gay, they wouldn't be upset at all.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

It doesn't seem like discrimination though.

The law says in practice, ''everyone can marry a person of the opposite sex.'' It doesn't have any specific provisions specifically ordering a detriment against gays.

Now if the law said, ''everyone who is gay must pay X% more taxes'' then that would clearly be discrimination against gays.

But saying that the present marriage laws discriminate against gays like is saying that if a country only officially recognized a right to play soccer but says nothing about ping pong, a person who loves ping pong and hates soccer can stand up and say ''hey this country discriminates against ping pong!''

It discriminates against children's right to be tied legally to the two people who care about them just like they would otherwise, so it is indeed sex-based discrimination. And same-sex couples are equivalent to mixed-sex couples, not single parents, for obvious reasons and scientific research.

Now it's a problem if both parents aren't treated like relatives with each other in important decisions, government counts and places to be present. Or if their obituary says they were never married. It's like an insult.

[God Kefka]

At least we can agree on one point...

At least I don't agree with homosexuality. Why should I be embarrassed.

it's an artistic preference.

Kind of like how I might not like people of a certain hair color...

That's all right?

[Thafoo]

At least I don't agree with homosexuality. Why should I be embarrassed.

it's an artistic preference.

Kind of like how I might not like people of a certain hair color...

That's all right?

Are you implying sexuality is a choice? Because I can assure you with all of my might that it is not.

[Transhuman Proteus]

We want the right to a marriage... in general. We want to marry who we love and we love our own sex.

but then it's not technically ''equal rights'''... that's an additional right you want to add that everyone can exercise.

Right now the rights are equal. Everyone has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, the gays have that right too. But changing the law so that everyone can marry a person of the same sex... it's technically not making things more equal; it's just adding an extra legal right across the board.

I'm pretty sure "a consenting adult may marry another consenting adult, regardless of race, creed or sex/gender" is more equal than "a consenting adult may marry another consenting adult, providing that consenting adult meets the requirements of marriage as set by old laws influenced by the dominant, and often discriminatory, religion of the time"

[Armed Union]

it's an artistic preference.

Kind of like how I might not like people of a certain hair color...

That's all right?

Are you implying sexuality is a choice? Because I can assure you with all of my might that it is not.

yup it is. I know of a few people that have changed from straight to gay.

[God Kefka]

it's an artistic preference.

Kind of like how I might not like people of a certain hair color...

That's all right?

Are you implying sexuality is a choice? Because I can assure you with all of my might that it is not.

Well I don't really know...

maybe...

I'm guessing it's not a choice since it would only be disadvantageous to choose to be gay given how so many people don't really like them.

But then again it was probably disadvantageous for many nerds to school with thick glasses and pocket protectors because they knew they would just get bullied for it... didn't stop them from coming to class every single day dressed like that.

Human nature is so complex...

[12 year olds]

Has anyone made the "Ben Dover and Phil McCracken" joke yet?

[The Scientific States]

Are you implying sexuality is a choice? Because I can assure you with all of my might that it is not.

yup it is. I know of a few people that have changed from straight to gay.

No, it's not. I didn't choose, and here's a source.

The people you know are lying, or more likely, you are lying about that.

http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx