|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,307
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,307 |
Originally posted by Fmr12B:
It's not the religious behind all of this.
I'm with Bush on this one, lets explore civil unions, and let the term Marriage be for a man and a woman. If we allow gays to marry then what else are we opening the door to?
Polygamy?
Maybe a Bisexual 3-some of 2-guys & 1 woman all want to be married.
We wouldn't want to dicriminate against anyones sexual agenda.
Why not ban the term "Marriage" altogether save for those in a Judeo-Christian religion, and turn any non-religious joining of two people into Civil Unions?
What drives me nuts is how people can equate gay marriage with being a "gateway" marriage, which makes no [censored] sense what so ever. The term marriage seriously needs a redefinition to fit the times. A union between two adult-aged, non related human individuals makes total sense as a definition to me.
You people scream about the sanctity of marriage, but you don't give a rat's ass about the straight folks who've been destroying the institution for decades by marrying FAR too young, too stupid, too often, or for OTHER gains be it financial or otherwise. I mean, look at how many celebrity marriages have failed. Do you think that all celebrity marriage should be banned because they may not create a child? What about two people who marry but are infertile. I guess they're screwed under your terms, right?
And to ask the inevitable question- how would the concept of two same-sex individuals alter how much you care about your marriage to your spouse? If it alters it, your marriage isn't as strong as you thought now, is it?
1998 SVT Contour Silver Frost for sale in Classifieds.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
You are COMPLETELY missing the point. It has no affect on one's personal life in that manner (in reference to the " how would the concept of two same-sex individuals alter how much you care about your marriage to your spouse?"). And marriage is not so you can have a baby last time I checked. Now, under the Christian religion, to have a baby you should be married, it is not, to be married you should have a baby. 
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 |
I agree 100%.
And who are any of us to decide on what love is and what bounds it holds? People today hold polygamous relationships. Although it's weird to me and you, do I have the right to tell them they can't be together because I can't handle their relationship?
These people are trying to eliminate the stigma their lifestyle has of being a "wild & crazy promiscuous" lifestyle and show the world that they can hold a serious, committed relationship just as easily as anyone else can and we refuse to validate their efforts because we have a hard time watching 2 guys make out in public. I bet nobody complains when it's 2 girls, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 709
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 709 |
just typical hypocrisy in america. Today my client was talking about how happy she was about bush winning. Then i was saying how i dont care much for politics because I see both sides of most issues. I made an example of mexican illegal immigrants which she went off on a big tirade. 5 minuts later she was telling me about her housekeeper that is an "illegal" mexican. Total hypocrite!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
I'm fine with them being together but not LEGALLY MARRIED. Umm dude, a lotta guys will complain about girls too. I only don't complain if they're hot, and then that's just cuz I'm your average guy. If I think about it I really don't like it and think it's wrong, but that's using my brain on top of my shoulders (doesn't get used much  ). And I'm sure plenty of women complain. But that has NOTHING to do with it. I can live with them doing that stuff. But again, they should not be able to be LEGALLY MARRIED. Refer to FMR's post.
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: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by daenku32:
Now, can you Davo give a reason to ban gays from marrying?
Marriage is the oldest and most basic social institution. Gay 'marriage' disrupts that social institution.
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'.
EDIT: Please note religion has nothing to do with this.
Last edited by Davo; 11/03/04 10:19 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,882 |
Originally posted by bishop375:
Do you think that all celebrity marriage should be banned
YES! good idea! 
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 198
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 198 |
Originally posted by Kremithefrog:
Like FMR said, so maybe a guy and two chicks should be able to marry then? I mean come on, it's not you, so why does it matter.  We have to have certain things certain ways. We're not killing gay people or stealing their property, they're just not allowed to marry.
For the same reason a Mormon guy can't marry two women today in Utah - it's against the law; a law that would be applied indiscriminately if gays were free to marry.
Same thing applies to two brothers, underage kids, a brother and sister etc; it is nonsensical to suggest that ending discrimination against gays opens the path to other forms of marriage that are currently against the law - no one is suggesting that these laws be overturned.
The difficulty is that the term "marriage" applies to both a civil union (civil, as in civil rights) and the religious ceremony and both are rooted in history.
The term "civil union" simply doesn't exist in any legalistic way (you don't go to city hall to apply for a civil union license), so gays right now have no other way to express their wish, but to demand the right to marry.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228 |
Originally posted by Fmr12B:
It's not the religious behind all of this.
I'm with Bush on this one, lets explore civil unions, and let the term Marriage be for a man and a woman. If we allow gays to marry then what else are we opening the door to?
Polygamy?
Maybe a Bisexual 3-some of 2-guys & 1 woman all want to be married.
We wouldn't want to dicriminate against anyones sexual agenda.
Agreed, and the thread starter is clearly immature.
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: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Frankly, I don't know why the government is involved, at all. Why does the gov care about a religious sacrament?
I'm all for powers of attorney and legal partnerships. If I want someone to have legal say over my medical care, or bank accounts, or whatever, I need to talk to a lawyer.
"Marriage" is meant to be procreative. Sorry guys. The "Gay Marriage" dog doesn't hunt.
As for the Christian Right, and their battle to "save marriage." I think we lost that battle when the Anglican Church accepted contraception back in, what, 1930?
For you homosexuals out there, I wouldn't worry. You enjoy an incredible rate of cultural shift--one that no other "minority" has ever seen. "Gay Marriage" or not, I think within a few years there will be no difference, in the societal mindset, between gay people living monogomously and re-married divorcees.
Confused?
"What God has joined, let no man put asunder." Divorce is a no-no, but, furthermore, the man who then seeks relations with another woman commits adultery--a mortal sin, no more or less severe than if one man "lies down" with another. In either case, you're going to Hell (if you read it that way.)
Yet, hardly anyone bats an eye at the 50% divorce rate, (vs the tiny percentage of gay people). And, therein lies the great hypocrisy.
Me? I'm Catholic. I'm against homosexuality, adultery, and all forms of sin, but I'm no angel, either. And I have no more problem with gay people than I do with deaf people. Frankly, I'm conflicted on a number of issues, and I don't think there are any easy answers in this one.
Sorry for the ramble.
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
