Do you support marriage for gay and transgender people?

[craig]

You haven't presented any other alternatives to these many, many things that marriage currently covers via laws, except trying to claim that a contract can deal with those things. But it doesn't. Like has been pointed out to you, marriage is a commonly recognized thing with commonly recognized responsibilities, rights, privileges that most people know about. They don't need the school to see your contract to know what you both agreed to in regards to the marriage. They don't need the hospital to see the contract that establishes this contractual relationship of "spouse". Because that recognition is already there.

A marriage is a contract. You can write that contract yourself (in which case it’s called a “premarital agreement”), or you can accept the default contract written by your state legislators. Now comes the state of Louisiana, determined to expand its citizens’ options. Henceforth, Louisianians will be able to choose between two prefabricated contracts, each with very different provisions for divorce. The first option is similar to the no-fault contract that is standard in other states. The second–the so-called “covenant marriage”–makes divorce far more difficult.

The Marriage Contract

Premarital agreements are rare. This observation used to dismay the late Nobel laureate George Stigler: He maintained that the grand institution of...

slate.com

 

[roguenuke]

No one suggested otherwise. Grasping about for your next strawman again?

You brought up family as part of one of the first quotes in that post. It was right there after procreation and child rearing, which is another thing same sex couples do. And since they do, and marriage has been proven to be beneficial to child rearing, that means that it would be beneficial whether the couple raising the child/children is opposite sex or same sex.

 

[roguenuke]

A marriage is a contract. You can write that contract yourself (in which case it’s called a “premarital agreement”), or you can accept the default contract written by your state legislators. Now comes the state of Louisiana, determined to expand its citizens’ options. Henceforth, Louisianians will be able to choose between two prefabricated contracts, each with very different provisions for divorce. The first option is similar to the no-fault contract that is standard in other states. The second–the so-called “covenant marriage”–makes divorce far more difficult.

The Marriage Contract

Premarital agreements are rare. This observation used to dismay the late Nobel laureate George Stigler: He maintained that the grand institution of...

slate.com

Yes, marriage is a contract, and the laws regarding marriage apply in many cases whether you accept the default or make your own because there are some that cannot be changed with a premarital agreement. Divorce is not the only thing that marriage covers. And either way, those within those contracts are still recognized by the government as "spouses" legally, that legal kinship is established.

 

[roguenuke]

Intimacy between a husband and a wife, like I said. I know. Married a Canadian back in the 80s briefly and went through the interviews in separate rooms.

Or a husband and his husband or wife and her wife. That is part of those laws for immigration. Intimacy does not just involve sex.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I was neither molested by a child, became gay or "hate" gays. Before all this gay marriage crap my views towards gays would consist of that if it feels good do it.

One cannot "become gay". There's no gay "germ" that gets passed around to "infect" people with gayness.
Likewise, sexuality is not binary, never has been, despite most orientations being concentrated along the ends of a continuum.
But it is without a doubt a continuum and not a fixed binary set, and some persons exist at various points along that continuum.

 

[Yes_Minister]

You are confused. I am the one arguing

Then what is your argument?

 

[Quag]

No one claimed it was. Resist the allure of the first potential strawman you can think of.

So why do you even mention it?

 

[dixon01767]

over 600 posts because bigots can't control their crying and meltdowns and normal people can't help but poke them with sticks and use facts to watch them REALLY get triggered and meltdown LMAO

We can see who is melting down.

 

[dixon01767]

Then what is your argument?

Which words dont you understand?

Marriage should be made available to any two consenting adults.

 

[dixon01767]

So why do you even mention it?

Never as much as even mentioned the "ability to have children" . Perhaps youve begun to perceive your strawmen as my actual arguments.

 

[dixon01767]

One cannot "become gay".

Of course they can. Its an identity. This is the 21st century and you can identify as anything you like. Hell, you can identify as a man on weekdays and as a woman on weekends if you like. "Plastic sexuality" has become fashionable

 

[AGENT J]

We can see who is melting down.

see triggered again!!!! LMAO thanks for proving my point!!!

yes we can and your posts and the proof lies in them are prime examples.
Remind us, how many lies and attacks, and false claims, have me and other posted??

 

[dixon01767]

You brought up family as part of one of the first quotes in that post.

Thats the judge in the court case. He was probably referring to the nuclear family.

 

[dixon01767]

see triggered again!!!! LMAO thanks for proving my point!!!

??? No Id say you are proving mine with the 6 exclamation points

 

[AGENT J]

??? No Id say you are proving mine with the 6 exclamation points

says the person who counted them like it matters LMAO


fact remains theres no special lgbt rights, let us know when that fact changes, thanks!

 

[dixon01767]

You brought up family as part of one of the first quotes in that post. It was right there after procreation and child rearing, which is another thing same sex couples do. And since they do, and marriage has been proven to be beneficial to child rearing, that means that it would be beneficial whether the couple raising the child/children is opposite sex or same sex.

The benefit is in having the mother and father in the home to care for the child together. Without them the child has only the hope thats someone else steps forward and voluntarily assumes those obligations. The abundance of single mothers on their own shows that frequently doesnt happen.
Encouraging heterosexual couples to marry reduces the number of single mothers on their own raising kids. Encouraging homosexual couples to marry does not and is instead about helping homosexuals feel better about their homosexuality.

 

[Yes_Minister]

Which words dont you understand?

You said that you were not trying to impose your values on others and when I asked for non religious argument on why gay marriage should be illegal, you cited that incest is illegal in the US, so what is your argument, what does one have to do with the other?

 

[AGENT J]

Encouraging heterosexual couples to marry reduces the number of single mothers on their own raising kids. Encouraging homosexual couples to marry does not and is instead about helping homosexuals feel better about their homosexuality.

hey look, you reposted the same triggered failed lie and it fails again
please post any facts you have to make your posted lie true . . oh wait, you cant cause there are none LMAO I love it!

 

[roguenuke]

The benefit is in having the mother and father in the home to care for the child together. Without them the child has only the hope thats someone else steps forward and voluntarily assumes those obligations. The abundance of single mothers on their own shows that frequently doesnt happen.
Encouraging heterosexual couples to marry reduces the number of single mothers on their own raising kids. Encouraging homosexual couples to marry does not and is instead about helping homosexuals feel better about their homosexuality.

Not necessary nor always a "benefit". In fact, some simply don't have both or either parents. Some parents abuse their kids, so someone else will need to raise them. Some children would not exist without some couple who couldn't have kids deciding to use other means to raise one.

Single mothers have nothing to do with two people of the same sex, living together in marriage, raising children.

 

[roguenuke]

Thats the judge in the court case. He was probably referring to the nuclear family.

Then post the link to that court case so we can all check out the context.

Nuclear families are not all that. In fact, they are a rather new concept, since in the past, extended families were much more common and the norm.

 

[Quag]

Never as much as even mentioned the "ability to have children" . Perhaps youve begun to perceive your strawmen as my actual arguments.

yeah ya did

The fact that only men and women produce children has nothing to do with morality, religion or personal beliefs. And if we are to insist that this new LGBTQ marriage weve implemented today now has nothing to do with procreation, you cant cling to the assertion that the single mother and daughter must be precluded from marriage because they might procreate or because the bible condemns it. Hypocrites, the whole lot of you.

But Ill play your sully game what is your actual objection?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Of course they can. Its an identity. This is the 21st century and you can identify as anything you like. Hell, you can identify as a man on weekdays and as a woman on weekends if you like. "Plastic sexuality" has become fashionable

Homosexuality is a sexual orientation, not "learned behavior" or a choice.
If it is, or was, then your heterosexuality is also a choice.
When did you CHOOSE to "become straight"?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

The benefit is in having the mother and father in the home to care for the child together. Without them the child has only the hope thats someone else steps forward and voluntarily assumes those obligations. The abundance of single mothers on their own shows that frequently doesnt happen.
Encouraging heterosexual couples to marry reduces the number of single mothers on their own raising kids. Encouraging homosexual couples to marry does not and is instead about helping homosexuals feel better about their homosexuality.

do you have a life? serious question.
SHEESH

 

[dixon01767]

We are dealing with marriage that exists right now, at this point in time.

Nope we are speaking of marriage in the last 100 years. YOUR WORDS you now seek to deny.

Child creation has never really been an important part of marriage, at least not in the last hundred years or so.

And those dictionary quotes were quoted by the Judge i the court case that occured within the last 100 years.

 

[roguenuke]

Nope we are speaking of marriage in the last 100 years. YOUR WORDS you now seek to deny.



And those dictionary quotes were quoted by the Judge i the court case that occured within the last 100 years.

Marriage in the last 100 years has included same sex marriages. But you are deflecting from the actual arguments being made.

Post the links to those cases, to the case that you are quoting there. How hard is it for you to do that? How far back is that decision? Maybe 1960s? You realize that things change in law and legal precedence within 60 years, right?