Gay Marriage
- Thread starter 1X83Z
- 2,302 comments
- 85,015 views
1mic
(Banned)
- 2,173
amen to thatOriginally posted by Mr. Snowtire
Love is,as love does. My city's Mayor is gay, and if he chooses to get married....groovy.Life is too short to deny yourself the power of love.
besides gay marriage is going to HAVE to happen sooner or later
but some people are right about children being messed up cus of gay marriages, and thats gonna be hard for the kid....
I find it ironic that this was the first of three one sentence posts in a row you put up, which could have all been in one post.
Great quote from Julia Roberts on gay marriage (sorry if this has already been posted in the thread): "Gay people have the same right to lose half their stuff as everyone else".
- 13,640
- North Jersey
- MistaX1
This is one of the best threads I've seen on GTP ever.
My oppinion on this topic:
I have no problem with gay marrage, or gays in general
I watch Chris Lowell on TV, I watch Queer Eye for the Straight guy, and I respect gays for their knowlage in areas that we straight men just can't comprehend really
We should respect gays for unknowingly mastering girls, something straight guys can't do, not hate them because of it
My oppinion on this topic:
I have no problem with gay marrage, or gays in general
I watch Chris Lowell on TV, I watch Queer Eye for the Straight guy, and I respect gays for their knowlage in areas that we straight men just can't comprehend really
We should respect gays for unknowingly mastering girls, something straight guys can't do, not hate them because of it
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
It was in direct response to these mulitple - pointlessly mulitple, may I add - posts from you:
Did you forget you made them just one page ago? I'd say they qualify you as the poster child for homophobia. That's what I called you. You forfeit your own right not to be called names by behaving that way. Certainly being called a child is not as bad as being called gross and disgusting.
Perhaps if you're offended by being called a child, you should not behave like one. So far that hasn't happened. You're a drama queen who craves attention. It's getting tiresome to everybody except you.
I think if two people want to get married, why not? I'm not marrying them and I'm not gonna have sex with them, so who cares. That's just my opinion. But as far as raising a child in a gay marriage, I'm not really sure about that. I had a friend that was raised by a lesbian couple, but she turned out fine I think.
- 8,707
- Utah
- ceiling_fan
I live in San Francisco, and most, if not everybody, supports gay marraige. To me, I don't see what's wrong with it. I mean put yourself in their position: You love someone, they love you, you wan't to get married. But you can't because it's against the law! Why is it against the law in the first place?
Danoff
Premium
- 34,134
- Mile High City
Normally I'd be the first to applaud this question, but it doesn't make sense here.
Marriages between men and women are recognized by the state and you receive benefits as a result. It's not something that people just do and that the state has declared illegal in some situations.
I need an example....
It's like getting a social security check from uncle sam. Not eveyone qualifies for it. It's not that they made it illegal for those people to get it, they just don't provide the service for those people.
Hmmm.... I can tell this still isn't clear enough.
Anyway, gay marriage isn't illegal... it simply isn't a benefit that the government offers. Just like the government doesn't offer free helicopters.
Clear now?
- 12,993
- USA! USA!
Well, I hadn't read his posts up until right now, but yeah I was laughing.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,134
- Mile High City
A marriage license is a legal document that two people enter into that allows them the benefits of having the state view them as married. There is no legal document that allows homosexuals that benefit.
The government does not make homosexual marriages illegal just like it doesn't make marriage between a dog and cat illegal. It just doesn't offer that benefit.
Currently the government does not offer free cars, but it doesn't make having a car illegal, it simply does not provide that service.
I'm not saying that not offering the benefit is a good thing, I think it's an unfair practice and that gay marriages should be legally recognized.
I was just responding to a statement that said "why were they made illegal" when in fact the decision was never made to prohibit them. The decision was made to offer the marriage benefit to man and woman, not to exclude other possible combinations.
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
I understand your point.
The government does not provide free cars. But there is nothing prohibiting me from obtaining my own car. There are private sources for cars. The government does not have a monopoly on cars in any way.
BUT:
The government DOES have a monopoly on car titles. Unless I fulfill certain legal criteria, I may not be allowed to actually own the car I physically posess, let alone use it on public property. Ownership of the car without the title is realtively meaningless, and in certain cases is actually illegal.
I can obtain a homosexual mate (if so inclined) and we can declare ourselves married, just like I can buy a car with no title. However, the state monopoly on marriage licenses PROHIBITS me from being legally married, just like I am allowed physically but prohibited legally from owning the car.
That fits a good enough definition of "illegal" in my book.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,134
- Mile High City
The tough part about giving examples is that it is easy for them to be picked apart and for the point to be missed.
....
I've written this post 3 times now and I'm having trouble making this clear.
....
If you start a government program to offer a benefit to a select portion of the population, you don't make anything illegal that wasn't illegal before. You simply add benefits to a group. There are no new rules for those who do not qualify, there are simply new options for those that do.
There is no destructive action taken by offering marriage to a small group of the population. There is only the benefit offered to the group that qualifies.
Government sanctioned marriage is not a fundamental right and at no point was the decision made to prohibit gays from betting married. Rather, the decision was not made to provide the marriage benefit to gays. There is an important difference there.
- 10,832
But there is no benefit in legal ownership of a car other than not brealing the law.
With marriage it is different. The only legal aspect is one of various institutional benefits. There is nothing illegal about being gay and saying "I'm in a homosexual marriage". The state's only response can be, "no you're not". But they can't impound your spouse or write a tiicket.
With marriage it is different. The only legal aspect is one of various institutional benefits. There is nothing illegal about being gay and saying "I'm in a homosexual marriage". The state's only response can be, "no you're not". But they can't impound your spouse or write a tiicket.
Similar threads
