oookay...
#1 Gay people are still people, if they want to "marry" or join in a "civil union," that's their business. What right does anyone have to nose in on someone else's life. There are greater problems facing the world today than 2 people living as a couple that love each other.
#2 Straight people in the USA averaging about 50% divorce rate. Gays couldn't possibly screw the "institution" of marriage up worse than straights.
#3 Straights that think it's about the "gay menace" horning in on their rights need to take the #8 sized butt plug out of their collective asses and go with something a wee bit smaller. Gays don't want any greater rights, protections or priveldges than straights do, they just want their unions to be RECOGNISED and have all the same rights, protections and priveledges straights have.
I don't see why people are getting into such a bind about this.
Also, BlackmagiC: you COULD have used the search button. Dave.org was kind enough to make the function available so we wouldn't have to re-rehash this stuff.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
gam i never said they cant have the same rights. all i said was i dont think it should be called marriage thats all.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
I agree that calling it "marriage" is something that's going to get a lot of people's knickers in a twist, Civil Union is fine. SSDN.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Just to elaborate:
1: I don't think a church should be forced to perform a "Marriage" that it doesn't approve of.. and that's fine, bigots have the right to refuse just like everyone else.
2: The "Marriage" aspect should carry the exact same responsibilities as a hetero marriage, and the same indemnities if the union ends in divorce, with no greater or lesser burdens than hetero marriages in respect to infidelity or relationship break-down.
3. I think all people should have to go through a marriage course (yes, I'm very serious) before being allowed to marry, either by the state or the church. If nothing else, at least there should be a joint habitation plan so you can really see if you are able to co-exist with someone. Call it living in sin or whatnot, if you have the trappings of a marriage, but no marriage, the only thing you lose is the easy way out, ideally, both people are committed enough to avoid needing that (and know each other well enough to avoid making it an attractive option).
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
now see we can agree. those are all very good ideas. as for the marriage courses,
most people gay or straight would have a problem with someone else telling them how
they should be married.
now my wife and i have been married for over ten years now, yes we got married young but we are still very much in love. i dont think i marriage class can teach you how to act thats something that takes your intire life to develope not just a few classes. but it
couldn't hurt just good luck getting people to agree with it.
i'm fine with calling it a civil union. the word marriage should be reserved for what most of the world would consider traditional. thats all i'm saying.
and homosexuals should be given all the same rights we as straights have.
thats just not right. again it goes back to i dont care what you do in your bedroom
but it also shouldnt effect your ablity to be with the one you love when there in the hospital. or not allow health care benifits to be shared. or even stop them from being able to adopt children or if they have there own the kids should be able to stay with out the courts or anyone else protesting it. i have two daughters and i dont let them watch my wife and me in bed so what in the world would make anyone think gays would?
it just doesn't make any sence.
just dont call it marriage
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Gay marriage as far as my religious beliefs go, need not even be voiced because everyone knows what I would say. The only way I would disagree setting aside religion for a moment, would be if there was an attempt (because it would never fall through anyway) at forcing churches to marry these homosexual couples. Sin is sin. I'm not going to talk down on a gay person while I'm out here fornicating you know? And even if I wasn't, I still sin and fall short of the glory of God. Ye without sin, cast the first stone.
"Speak the truth, and leave immediately after"
"The urge to save Humanity is almost ALWAYS a false front for the urge to rule"
"He who knoweth things as they are and not as they are said or seem to be, he truly is wise, and is taught of God more than of men."
well anyone out there? who wants to throw the first one?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jackalope wrote:no i was equateing the definition of marriage supplied by roofy which didnt specify any
bounds on marrige. the examples i set forth are by definiton allowable marriages.
if marrying a 12 year old is offensive to you good it should be. if marrying 6 women is also offensive to you then again good it should be. then why am i wrong if i find gay
marrige offensive? the definition set forth by roofy says ANY union can be a marrige,
all i said is that i do not agree with it. and it is quite obvious that you yourself do not agree with it either if its used to do things that you dont like. well too bad the definition
allows it.
mr gol' teef i still dont see where youve shown me to be ignorant. the only one here that fits that mold is you. you only like the definiton when it applies to what you want and how you want it. sorry you cant have it both ways.
Is that what you said, really? G'damn if I can't read what the hell you're typing. Not only can you not spell, you can't capatilize or make paragraphs properly, either. Hard to argue with someone who can't communicate. From the looks of it, I'm not the only one trying to figure out what you're trying to say. Get a word processor and run the checks, first.
---
For the record, I'm not gay, have never been gay, nor do I intend to ever be gay. But, I defend homosexuals because the only difference between them and "normal" people is the gender which they are attracted to.
As far as the term "marriage", it's not that the gays want to be blasphemers and strike down the integrity of religious institutions, they want to enjoy the rights and freedoms just the same as heterosexual couples do. When the term "marriage" is used, it is generally inferring the state of civil union, not religious sacrament.
Currently #4 in Ecotec Forced Induction horsepower ratings. 505.8 WHP 414WTQ!!!
Currently 3rd quickest Ecotec on the .org - 10.949 @ 131.50 MPH!!!
and you fix your nappy a$$ hair. sorry didnt realize you were an english teacher. and i could give a good $h!t less if you are. and if you cant understand what im trying to say then do me a favor and stfu. and just in case you dont know or dont understand what that means it means shut the f--k up. or were those words all too big for you?
I see that you are at a complete loss as to how to strike back to your realization that your the ignorant one. Its ok most people with lesser inteligence do feel the need to
try and flex the little grey matter that they have when confronted with someone that they feel inferior to. Its ok I understand. I was never any good with spelling or aparently being able to comunicate either. Thats ok those things can be fixed. But unfortunatly for you being an ignorant a$$ can not. Dont worry I dont think none the less of you for haveing such an afliction, no, rather I pity you and only wish you the best that your poor little mind can do for you and your loved ones mr. webmaster.
how was that did ya understand it ok? all caps right? puntuation? i know the spelling may be off a bit but i hope it wasnt too hard for a person such as yourself to understand.
and so far there bright boy you are the only one with a problem. my spelling does suck but noone else seems to have your level of dificulty with it. so to you i must appoligize
rocket scientist man. yes i am sorry, sorry you are the way you are.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope: I think what he's trying to say is that he's losing your arguement in the mechanics of english printed language you're side stepping.
Instead of ripping Agustin (who makes cogent points when necessary, and though he was more a little abrasive this time, the point stands) it might be an Idea to re-read before you post. The odd screw up in spelling or what not isn't a big deal, but when we lose your point because you didn't cap/punctuate/spellcheck/etc. it kind of defeats the purpose of posting in the first place.
I don't get down on you for it, but I gotta admit I struggle with reading it and getting your meaning out of the post.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
BlacKMagiC wrote:Gays are nothin more then mentally disturbed attention whores
you are nothing more than a mentally disturbed attention whore. you need to grow up and learn to accept others. hypocrite.
Apparently you're only supposed to tolerate people that are the same as you.
I'm willing to tolerate most things as long as I don't have to pay for it.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
this is just amazing, I can't beleive how many discriminating bigots are in the world.
anyways heres my 2 cents
I think that the act of joining 2 legal adults in a legal bond, should be a civil union, and applicable to man and man, woman and woman, and man and woman. A marrage should have no legal bond at all, just religious, that way gays and straights can have legal rights of a couple, and leave the religion part to the churches, that way its fair for everyone.
and for all you who think that gay marraige ruins the sanctity of marraige, heres one for you
"TO DEATH DO US PART"..........wheres divorce covered in that.......so i say if gay marriage isn't legal, divorce shouldn't be legal, because divorce ruins the sancitity of marraige too
and i am not gay either, i just feel that they are discriminated against, for no reason at all
You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan
(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)
mikec2003 wrote:and i am not gay either, i just feel that they are discriminated against, for no reason at all
Amen to that!
www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837
Okay a few quick thoughts from me
1. I agree that it should be called a civil union, NOT a marrige.
2. Churches or ordained(sp?) ministers should not be forced to prefom these "unions"
if it is against thier belief system.
3. Gays should not be discriminated against for thier beliefs, no matter how screwed
up others think they are.
4. Now I in no way support the gay lifstyle, but as I do not have to bear witness to it, I do
not care.
5. There should be a required "marriage course" for any couple even thinking about
marriage. The minister that married me and my wife will not marry you if you have
been devorcied or has any doubts at all about the union. He is a firm believer in "Till
death do us part" and to my knowledge was never preformed a marriage that failed.
This is a common subject at work and the most common thing that you hear is"god nade Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" a few of the maintance workers have it painted on thier tool boxes.
Marriage for same sex people is NOT legal in SF.
It is in Massachusetts.
I have zero problem with civil unions, I just don't like the word MARRIAGE for gays. Just my opinion.
jackalope wrote:and you fix your nappy a$$ hair. sorry didnt realize you were an english teacher. and i could give a good $h!t less if you are. and if you cant understand what im trying to say then do me a favor and stfu. and just in case you dont know or dont understand what that means it means shut the f--k up. or were those words all too big for you?
I see that you are at a complete loss as to how to strike back to your realization that your the ignorant one. Its ok most people with lesser inteligence do feel the need to
try and flex the little grey matter that they have when confronted with someone that they feel inferior to. Its ok I understand. I was never any good with spelling or aparently being able to comunicate either. Thats ok those things can be fixed. But unfortunatly for you being an ignorant a$$ can not. Dont worry I dont think none the less of you for haveing such an afliction, no, rather I pity you and only wish you the best that your poor little mind can do for you and your loved ones mr. webmaster.
how was that did ya understand it ok? all caps right? puntuation? i know the spelling may be off a bit but i hope it wasnt too hard for a person such as yourself to understand.
and so far there bright boy you are the only one with a problem. my spelling does suck but noone else seems to have your level of dificulty with it. so to you i must appoligize
rocket scientist man. yes i am sorry, sorry you are the way you are.
So what you're saying is you're lazy and I have to suffer through your points, right? And when I misunderstand them, *I'm* the ignorant one, right?
Here's where you ARE ignorant.
jackalope wrote:
. but for the love of god stop trying to tell the world its normal cause its not.
What's not normal about it? Animals are gay, too. Did you miss the hilarious
How to ungay my dogs thread?
I'm also sure if you threw them on an island, in 100 years there would be people there. They DO understand how to reproduce. The thing is in 100 years there would be a ratio of straights to gays that we'd expect in any other society.
jackalope wrote:
botom line is if it makes you happy to be gay fine but stop trying to force your twisted views on the rest of us.
WHO exactly is forcing their views on you? I want names.
jackalope wrote:
and if they can whats the difference if you wanted to marry oh say a 12 year old boy?
So I re-read what you responded to, and yet it is you who failed to read afterall. See, the definition stated that
....contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>
See, marrying a minor is illegal, regardless. Therefore, marrying a 12 year old boy would still be illegal, even under the supplied definition.
In the other evolution thread, you displayed a complete lack of knowledge about any of the concepts being discussed.
Don't call ME ignorant, FOOL.
---
In regards to the last point:
I've seen a lot of people raise hackles about this kind of nonsense. People marrying children (some states like Utah I believe allow marriage as young as 14 with parental consent), people marrying animals, people marrying corporations... etc.
That's unequivocal foolishness and taking something WAY beyond what the intent is. Maybe it's just Canada, but the law is interpreted narrowly. A child is a person, but until they reach the age of consent (16 in most provinces) they may not marry, even with parental consent, a corporation is not considered a person (it's called a party strictly speaking), and neither is an animal (which is chattle, and has limited rights and protections).
http://pm.gc.ca/eng/news.asp?id=421
^^ Read this, and understand what it's about. It's the Prime Minister's speech to the House of Commons (The rule in the Commons is that you direct your comments about whatever to the Speaker, and others may comment to the speaker. I'm not sure what the rules of discourse in the House of Congress/Senate are).
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-38/C-38_1/C-38_cover-e.html
^^ The actual text of the law.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Agustin: I mean in the 70's or so...
If I'm wrong, please correct me.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
And if we were to be raised with the thinking that only men should marry men because they have so much in common and would get along great, and women should only marry women because of the same thing, you would all be here arguing now that a man marrying a woman is just not normal.
And I'm sure someone will throw it out on the table "well if that happened the world would just die out without reproduction." Well in that case theres always surrogates and artificial insemination. So can't really argue with that.
Be open-minded for a minute (is that really possible with people on this board?) put yourselves in their shoes. If you truly could not deal with the opposite sex, and get sick of their games would you really wanna put up with one for the rest of your life and possibly be miserable forever? Or die alone with a bunch of cats? Or rather be happily united with someone you have so much in common with, get along great with and are madly in love with - rather they be the same sex or not?
I can't blame girls for wanting to be a lesbian because 1) there are way too many @!#$ guys out there, 2) alot of them just attempt to use you for sex, 3) ALOT of them don't know how to treat a girl with respect, 4) and why not have a dildo shoved up you that could go forever instead of a dick that could possibly only go a couple times, have to worry about him being a minute man, or have to worry about ED.
Same for men who want to be gay, I can't blame them for not wanting to put up with women's bull@!#$, and games. Or constantly getting stuck up gold-diggers, or dumb ones who can't even hold a conversation.
You're not born knowing how to act as a husband or wife when you grow up, it's all in what you see and learn. Some choose to learn that the opposite sex just isn't worth their time and that they're not compatible. Atleast they're going out there and making sure they're happy with what they decide on in life. It's not like they're out in public in the middle of the street bare-naked performing sexual acts. What goes on behind their closed doors is their issue, NOT yours. The majority of gays / lesbians are the same as any other person, they just choose to express themselves differently.
Now I'll wait for the ignorant ones to come out and call me a lesbian because they know so much about me from reading a post, right?
