|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 220
CEG\'er
|
CEG\'er
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 220 |
Quote:
Maybe that's the first step for them then. My issue is that just because a person's sexual preference is different we have to make new terms for them to suit that difference? Howabout when thugs in the ghetto get married we call it "Hooked Up"? Howabout when hillbillies with no teeth get married we call it "Cousin Fuzzin"? (JOKE!) Why should we make it different?
Why shouldn't we make new terms. Afterall, it isn't a union between a man and a woman, therefore it cannot be considered a marriage. And your thugs and hillbillies analogy is ridiculous. White, brown, yellow, pink, red, orange, whatever color you are, it's still between a MAN and a WOMAN. I have no problem with homosexuals but fighting to make the legal union between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman seems to be turning into more of a ploy to get peoples attention. Why can you people just not realize it's not marriage, get over it, and find a new name for it.
Joel Falkenberg
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228 |
Originally posted by DJ Capp 911:
Originally posted by Sandman333:
Originally posted by CHF_Slapaho:
I still don't see how that gives anyone the right to push their beliefs on anyone, no matter how old the culture or tradition is.
It's not a culture I believe in or was raised in, so why am I made to live in a society that feels the need to evangelize it's beliefs on everyone that it doesn't agree with? THAT is not what this country was founded on. THAT is the primary reason that people left Europe for the New World, for the freedom to practice their beliefs without persecution.
Problem is, we are not living under a dictator. The vast majority have spoken, and they do not want gay marriage. As much as you do not like it, you have to accept it. That is the facts of the situation.
Well in that case ship me back down to alabama and have me start picking cotton again. Just because the majority votes for it doesn't make it right. The majority could be misinformed.
Wow, I am gone to work for a couple days and miss a couple hundred posts.
Anyway, so you think that given the chance, the general populace would vote to reinstate slavery? Talk about being out of touch with reality.
95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD
2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic
2004 Honda VTX 1800N1
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228 |
Originally posted by bishop375:
Childish rant? What was irrelevant in my post? None of it. Nor was it childish. You can try to put whatever spin you want on it, but the point is that there is NO solid argument AGAINST gay marriage outside of quasi-cultural and religious arguments. Cultures change with time. The values you and I have today are completely different from what they were hundreds of years ago on this soil.
The fact of the matter is this- there IS no solution to this that will ever satisfy both sides. Either redefining marriage or destroying it altogether and creating nothing but federal/state civil unions, they're both bad choices. The question is which one sucks less- blatant sexism or "ruining it" for everyone.
Apparently, according to the majority opinion, those traditional values have not changed as much as you think they have....
95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD
2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic
2004 Honda VTX 1800N1
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228 |
Originally posted by svtcarboy:
While I was disappointed with the voters in those 11 states for adding hate and discrimination into their Constitutions, reading this thread has left me bewildered.
I truly do not understand why people oppose gay marriage. Allowing homosexuals to make the commitment that too many heterosexuals take for granted does not have any effect on heterosexuals. Your marriage is suddenly not any less than it was, it is not preventing you from doing anything or affecting you in any way. It only allows gay and lesbian people equal access to a social institution.
Calling a homosexual couple a "civil union" while calling a heterosexual couple a "marriage" is the same as sending black children and white children to two different schools. Even if they are identical, they are not equal. This premise was ruled on by the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board, and applies to all governmental institutions, including marriage.
The slippery slope of polygamous marriage (totally different type of commitment) or of close relatives (potential for biological harm) are unrelated to removing gender discrimination in giving lifelong commitments equal billing.
I will only consider the term "civil union" acceptable and equal if all heterosexual commitments of the same type are given the same name.
I am not asking anyone to approve of gays or of gay marriage. You can hate it as much as you want, call me names on the street, whatever. I am not hurting you in any way or affecting you in any way by getting married. However, you are harming me when you put additional roadblocks between me and my right to marry the person I want to spend the rest of my life with.
The reverse arguement also applies. What are gays missing out on by simply not giving the legal term "marriage" to their relationship? Are they any less committed to each other because of that? Seems the argument has been a little one-sided on this issue.
95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD
2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic
2004 Honda VTX 1800N1
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228 |
Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
I love how people that are for gay marriage love to preach respect for people's opinions, and accepting people for who they are....
But when someone has an opinion different from them, no matter if its based on faith, morals, whatever, those people are wrong and they are bigots and haters for having that opionion.
The true hypocrites are those that can't accept the fact that some (and by the votes, a majority) people think that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
BINGO!
95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD
2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic
2004 Honda VTX 1800N1
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,397
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,397 |
Originally posted by Sandman333:
What are gays missing out on by simply not giving the legal term "marriage" to their relationship?
ummm...EQUALITY?
Formerly known as Sneaku
I MISS MY BABY!!!
'00 Blk CSVT #1087/2150 built 12/23/99
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 220
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 220 |
Originally posted by Freakshow:
Originally posted by Sandman333:
What are gays missing out on by simply not giving the legal term "marriage" to their relationship?
ummm...EQUALITY?
How so? They have the right to marry a woman if they want. You say it like a straight person is allowed to marry samesex but a gay person isn't.
Joel Falkenberg
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,118
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,118 |
Originally posted by Freakshow:
Originally posted by Sandman333:
What are gays missing out on by simply not giving the legal term "marriage" to their relationship?
ummm...EQUALITY?
They are not equal, the latest vote said so by denying them marriage in 11 states. 
"Moore has also accused the American people of being the stupidest, most naive people on the face of the Earth. And after last weekend, he's got the box office numbers to prove it!"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,397
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,397 |
And that's exactly what the problem is: discrimination.
As far as Sandman's previous post. This thread wasn't really started because of gays not being able to use the term "marriage" (even though it's been a big part of the discussion) but with voting the way it went there isn't really even open discussion available for civil unions in a lot of states now. No matter how you cut it and no matter what the "majority" might say it is discrimination. I don't believe that people should have to accept homosexuality or like it or anything, but they should not be allowed to discriminate against it simply because it doesn't fit "their morals" just like no one should be allowed to force a black person to eat in a different restaurant simply because they're morals tell them black people are bad, wrong, or subhuman etc.
Formerly known as Sneaku
I MISS MY BABY!!!
'00 Blk CSVT #1087/2150 built 12/23/99
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by Freakshow:
Originally posted by Sandman333:
What are gays missing out on by simply not giving the legal term "marriage" to their relationship?
ummm...EQUALITY?
and that about sums it up. not that i agree with or anything because i'm still on the fence on this issue.
i see youre in the military (right?). what about gays in the military? the dont ask, dont tell policy is kind of discriminatory. dont ya think? (not trying to chum any flamebait here but curious as to people in here thoughts on that, especially our CEG servicemen).  they made such a big issue out of it years ago and now its kinda just forgotten. ever meet any men you knew were gay in the military? or do they have to hide it?
Originally posted by Tourgasm:
Sometimes you can mess up a word so bad that spell check doens't know what the hell you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
