|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
Just as it's someone's right to be gay, it's someone's else's right to not agree with it.
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 810
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 810 |
But it's nobody's right to take your freedoms away from you because you're gay.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 7,431
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 7,431 |
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.
And the carboy speaks!
Being a practicing Catholic, my views are slightly contradictory. Marriage is a holy sacrament between a Catholic man and woman as I belive. However, this is where separation of church and state come in. I support the legal union of couples whether heterosexual or gay. As the government has decided it is okay to use the term "marriage" for heterosexual legal partnerships it is only fitting therefore that the same term for all couples to legally come together.
It all comes down to a definition of the word "marriage," which has lost its original meaning among today's society. Personally I would consider all non-religious "married" couples to be simply under "civil union" relationships, but as the government has decided to associate the word "marriage" to those relationships I see absolutely no reason why gay couples should not legally "marry" in the terms of the government. The difference between common-law "marriage" and "civil union" if passed will yield results exactly as James says: separate.
FWIW - As for my religious views on homosexual relationships, that is another debate.  (I personally am at constant moral dilemma as to whether I do or do not support it given recent information and findings versus traditional views and age-old facts.) Regardless of religious (or even moral) views though, legal views are an entirely separate matter and should be treated as such. And I do have gay friends.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,812
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,812 |
Originally posted by R_G:
Originally posted by Fat Mike:
I challenge anyone who thinks gay marriage is wrong, to actually go out and become friends with a gay person. They're some of the coolest and most sincere people I know.
Ohhhhhh, pweeeeeeeeeaze, they are the same as all other ppl - cool and uncool, pleasant and unpleasant, greedy and generous, nasty and good-hearted. They are the most sincere people? Generally speaking - lemme ask you, how on Earth can you jump to conclusions based on your personal friendship with several Oregon homosexuals? Maybe you lucked in by having met only "coolest and most sincere" ones? Besides, Mike, u r like churning out/operating in absolute terms - the ppl u personally consider as the most sincere might seem exactly opposite to somebody else.
I guess that by labeling homosexuals in the way u did - u r not stepping far away from narrow-minded anti-homosexuals bumper stickers carrying old ladies.
I never said they were all cool and sincere, hence my usage of the word some. Some gay people I know annoy the hell out of me, but so do plenty of straight people. I just don't hang out with them then - but I don't try to take away their rights or tell them how to act. I'm simply stating that people shouldn't be afraid to get to know gay people. Also, as I have stated many times before, I'm not asking anyone to accept homosexual lifestyles - if you think they're wrong, then that's your choice. But I think it's really wrong that people opposed to it are so willing to change our constitution to take away rights from them. I don't see how those are absolute statements.
I think a lot of the opposition doesn't look at gay people as actual people, based on the fact that many of them avoid friendships with them. Our constitution was created to give rights to people and to protect our freedoms - not take them away from us.
Quote:
If an overwhelming majority of people in this country feel that it is wrong to allow them to marry, why should they be allowed to impose their will on us?
Just because the majority thinks a certain way, doesn't make discrimination right. We shouldn't have to vote on whether or not these people can marry. They're not imposing their will on anyone but themselves. You're the one imposing your will/beliefs on them. It doesn't effect you in any way if they get married.
1999 Black SVT
"If I were an admin I'd ban you without a second thought. " ~Trapps
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 810
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 810 |
"gays forcing their beliefs on me.."
That's the most asenine, ignorant thing I've read here all year.
Since when has a gay person confronted you and told you to start dating another dude? They're forcing their beliefs on you? Have you been watching too much Bravo or something? Talk about blatant homophobia.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,193
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,193 |
Accepting opinions and respecting people does not strip our ability to have our own views on the opinions and actions of people.
However, it is hard to accept what you do not understand. I am utterly bewildered by the fact that so many people oppose same-sex marriage, and that people truly believe allowing gays and lesbians to marry has any impact on them or their lives.
Calling the amendments banning gay marriage bigotry and hatred (which I truly believe they are) does not mean I am calling the people who voted for it bigots and haters. This is the same as being able to hate what your child does while still loving them with the entire depth of your being.
How are gay people getting married imposing their will on anyone else and impacting anyone else? Heterosexuals will still be able to do and be everything they can do or be today.
Since there is no impact or harm to those outside the marriage, people can disapprove of the gay marriage as much as they want (like what can happen with straight marriages), but there is no right to deny gays equal access to marriage.
People can hold all the values they want, but they have no business to restrict the rights of others because of it when they are not impacted by it.
Brad "Diva": 2004 Mazda 6s 5-door, Volcanic Red
Rex: 1988 Mazda RX-7 Vert, Harbor Blue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
And what if a guy wants to marry 20 women. Or a horse. Or... I know those are extreme, but that's the point some people are making. It opens door for stuff. I think a civil would be ok. Marriage, by common definition, is The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife (dictionary.com). I'm not into changing long long standing traditions, especially ones that mean something to me.
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,713
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 4,713 |
I was pretty pissed to see that UT passed their anti-gay marriage ban, too. Here's my take on it:
1) Since it's discriminating against gays, the law-makers decided to make it look fair and add in some clause against common-law marriages, too. It passed only because the people saw "Gay Marriage" and got scared. Not enough consideration was taken into the other clauses.
2) Too many people confuse being gay as being perverse. Newsflash! Every gay man that walks by you didn't just check you out, and doesn't want to hump you!  Our manly insecurities are blinding us.
3) The stuff about other special interest groups jumping in is BS. Do you think poligamists really think it's right, or are they just horny?
4) The worst part about this fu*(ing ammendment is that it's now written into law that it's legal to descriminate againts someone because of their sexual preference. Rights have been denied based solely on sexual preference.
5) Edit: I'll remove this for the time-being.
Ok, I'm done ranting for now.
Last edited by Derk2000; 11/04/04 05:56 AM.
Derek
Scion xB 5-spd
Previous: 2000 Silver Frost SVT
Please share the road with cyclists.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,193
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,193 |
The fears of the slippery slope have no basis. The commitment remains the same, with a person choosing to enter a commitment with the person (s)he wants to spend the rest of their lives together.
Polygamy is not in the issue because it involves more than two consenting adults and completely changes the nature of the commitment and the relationship. Marrying an animal is completely different as animals are not able to express legal consent to any action.
People are spreading fear and paranoia as propaganda tools against gay marriage. They make no logical sense.
Brad "Diva": 2004 Mazda 6s 5-door, Volcanic Red
Rex: 1988 Mazda RX-7 Vert, Harbor Blue.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
James, I'm asking for your opinion on this: Originally posted by Davo:
I'm all for legal recognition of homosexual relationships. Anything less than that would be discrimination. I don't understand why the homosexual community puts so much emphasis on beoming heterosexuals. This is analagous to the feminists basing the success of their movement on how much more like men they can become. If homosexuals put as much energy into building the prestige and significance of their relationships as they put into trying to become part of a historically and socially heterosexual institution, they would advance much further towards 'equality'.
|
|
|
|
|
