Gay Marriage
- Thread starter 1X83Z
- 2,302 comments
- 84,506 views
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
... and it's not about the money.
Gay people want their marriage recognized legally out of pride for their way of life. It's a fairly arbitrary line to draw that marriage can only be between man and wife. Let's take a step back from the christian standpoint here...
Religion is not supposed to be part of the U.S. We're supposed to be founded on the notion of freedom of religion.... so what if your religion dictates that you be gay?
The point at hand is whether to recognize marriage legally. Anything legal should not have religious reasons behind it. So let's look at the facts.
What are the differences between hetero and homo marriages.
1) In one case the couple is capable of having a baby.
2) In one case the act of having sex is slightly different (altered by a few inches and evolutionary intent).
3) Slightly different household products are purchased and used in different cases.
4) Conversations between the couple will be (in some cases) on a different topic.
5) Either title Mr. or Mrs. is not applicable to either person in the homosexual marriage depending on the gender of the couple.
6) I'm running out of differences.
Since cases 1-5 are applicable to differences between different hetero marriages... I see no point to make a legal distinction between heterosexual and homosexual marriages.
Gay people want their marriage recognized legally out of pride for their way of life. It's a fairly arbitrary line to draw that marriage can only be between man and wife. Let's take a step back from the christian standpoint here...
Religion is not supposed to be part of the U.S. We're supposed to be founded on the notion of freedom of religion.... so what if your religion dictates that you be gay?
The point at hand is whether to recognize marriage legally. Anything legal should not have religious reasons behind it. So let's look at the facts.
What are the differences between hetero and homo marriages.
1) In one case the couple is capable of having a baby.
2) In one case the act of having sex is slightly different (altered by a few inches and evolutionary intent).
3) Slightly different household products are purchased and used in different cases.
4) Conversations between the couple will be (in some cases) on a different topic.
5) Either title Mr. or Mrs. is not applicable to either person in the homosexual marriage depending on the gender of the couple.
6) I'm running out of differences.
Since cases 1-5 are applicable to differences between different hetero marriages... I see no point to make a legal distinction between heterosexual and homosexual marriages.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
I don't see the part of his post that you're referring to here.
I do however see that you've gotten offended, and rather easily I might add. I've taken way worse from milefile. You've got to get past your own personal feelings and deal with the issue in facts. I'm not saying that duke personally attacked you (which I'd prefer you substantiate) but even if he did you should be able to handle it. Look for the arguments in his post and use them as an opportunity to further your own understanding of your position (and his understanding of your position).
- 3,194
Ahhh,.. the blame game,....
What ever happened to the flame game? It's a lot more entertaining, and occassionally more productive
What ever happened to the flame game? It's a lot more entertaining, and occassionally more productive
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
Look at it this way DGB. If you're right, you'll probably want to get your message out, so try to communicate clearly and effectively... and keep trying. If you're wrong, you'll want to know about that, so try to communicate your position clearly and effectively and look for criticisms of your arguments as an opportunity to clarify your stand or your understanding.
- 3,194
This is the whole problem.....
It's the OPINIONS forum,... NO ONE is RIGHT or WRONG,.. get used to it.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
I'm going to re-iterate my point here because I think it has gotten lost with the hurt feelings.
I can't see any important distinctions when it comes to legally recognizing the marriage of two individuals based on their gender (or even lack thereof).
Can anyone explain to me one difference that should be legally considered? Keeping in mind that religious reasons should have no bearing on law.
I can't see any important distinctions when it comes to legally recognizing the marriage of two individuals based on their gender (or even lack thereof).
Can anyone explain to me one difference that should be legally considered? Keeping in mind that religious reasons should have no bearing on law.
- 3,194
pfft,.. we're talking about american government right?
- 3,194
get used to this:
- 3,194
Now your just lacking common sence.
Everyone who has any clue about anything knows that taking the lords name in vein is a sin to christians,... why WOULDNT it be offensive to him,.. we all know he's a christian,...
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
Well I'm sorry. I don't think it's my or duke's duty to keep up with all of the different things that might be offensive to different cutures. That task would be impossible. He just wants preferential treatment becaue his religion happens to be common in this part of the world.
- 2,732
Back on topic, kinda:
Like I said earlier, as long as they don't gloat, I have no problem. It's kind of like straight marriages for that matter. If anybody gloats about their marriage, it's just like "Shut up! You're only doing this to get attention!" Now, I'm not saying that when gays get married, it's for attention, but that when people gloat about their marriage, homo/heterosexual(unless they just got proposed to or something) it's stupid because most likely it's a fruad relationship.
The only problem I can really forsee is with two women trying to have a child. I mean, I don't mean to sound like a biggot here, but think how odd that would be, as a CHILD, to be raised in a family that was you and two women(No father, not one that got divorced or died or became your father from a one-night-stand), that would be devistational...
Like I said earlier, as long as they don't gloat, I have no problem. It's kind of like straight marriages for that matter. If anybody gloats about their marriage, it's just like "Shut up! You're only doing this to get attention!" Now, I'm not saying that when gays get married, it's for attention, but that when people gloat about their marriage, homo/heterosexual(unless they just got proposed to or something) it's stupid because most likely it's a fruad relationship.
The only problem I can really forsee is with two women trying to have a child. I mean, I don't mean to sound like a biggot here, but think how odd that would be, as a CHILD, to be raised in a family that was you and two women(No father, not one that got divorced or died or became your father from a one-night-stand), that would be devistational...
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
...and rj has breached the issue of children.
It gets worse rj if you look into it further. The core of the problem is here:
People argue that homosexual couples would not be able to provide the right kind of enviornment for a child, so they should not be allowed to adopt. At at the minimum, they should be put at the back of the line to adopt.
My answer to that is - if that is the case, then single people trying to adopt should be put at the back of the line for adoption (or be kept from adopting) as well.
It would only be the fair thing to do.
It gets worse rj if you look into it further. The core of the problem is here:
People argue that homosexual couples would not be able to provide the right kind of enviornment for a child, so they should not be allowed to adopt. At at the minimum, they should be put at the back of the line to adopt.
My answer to that is - if that is the case, then single people trying to adopt should be put at the back of the line for adoption (or be kept from adopting) as well.
It would only be the fair thing to do.
- 7,588
- Whateversville
- Flerbizky
But people who spend the majority of their life boozed up or on drugs can have all the friggin' children they like.. And smack them back and forth and tell the nurses for the 1700th time that the kid fell down the stairs...
Makes perfect sense if you ask me
So pleeease - keep the gay couples away from the adoption line...
Danoff
Premium
- 34,036
- Mile High City
well I personally don't see any reason to keep gay couples away from the adoption line. But others cite a less rich environment as a reason. I say if they do this, we're going to have to descriminate against single people....
but I don't think they should do that. I think gay people should be able to adopt.
but I don't think they should do that. I think gay people should be able to adopt.
Similar threads
