One question only--How would allowing gay marriage affect YOUR marriage?

[ProudAmerican]

Why are all gay people forced to accept heteros? Seems some heteros demand acceptance from gay people while not accepting gay people.

I didnt realize heteros were in the media trying to get their lifestyly recognized by the majority.

there would be no need for that, since heterosexuals are the norm.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Nobody's forcing anybody. Those 39% support gay marriage without a gun to their head. Some people understand that it's about love between two people, not a word.

what about the other 61% ?

its a good bet this will continue untill they have accepted them too.

wonder what the percentage was 10 years ago?

keep pushing, and pushing and pushing, untill people just grow weary of the fight and accept it.

and it is about a word. and its the homossexuals that are making it about a word. if all they wanted was equal rights, they wouldnt care what it was called.

I know I wouldnt.

 

[Kelzie]

what about the other 61% ?

its a good bet this will continue untill they have accepted them too.

wonder what the percentage was 10 years ago?

keep pushing, and pushing and pushing, untill people just grow weary of the fight and accept it.

and it is about a word. and its the homossexuals that are making it about a word. if all they wanted was equal rights, they wouldnt care what it was called.

I know I wouldnt.

It was 12% less ten years ago. Like I said, society advances and people become more tolerant. You can't force tolerance on others, so obviously it is something people discovered on their own. Just wait until my generation is in power. I know ONE person my age who doesn't support gay marriage.

There are many that do just care about the rights. It is not enough for me though. To not give them the same word us heteros use means that we still don't see their relationship as worthy in our eyes. If it was the same thing as marriage, we would call it marriage. Seperate but equal was struck down long ago.

 

[ProudAmerican]

It was 12% less ten years ago. Like I said, society advances and people become more tolerant.

or simply grow tired of the fight. ram something down someones throat long enough (sorry for that immage in this debate) and they will simply give up.

 

[RightinNYC]

they said its a basic right, but not a constitutional right.

I think we might just be having a semantical difference here. By virtue of procreation being a basic right, it doesnt need to be stated in the constitution. It's assumed to be understood that it's a right in the same way as the right to breathe air and drink water. Neither of those are "constitutional" rights, but they both are protected.

furthermore...

Doesn't disprove the decision. Brown v Board "ended" segregation of schools, and that certainly continued on for a while.

 

[RightinNYC]

or simply grow tired of the fight. ram something down someones throat long enough (sorry for that immage in this debate) and they will simply give up.

:lol: hahahhahha

 

[Kelzie]

or simply grow tired of the fight. ram something down someones throat long enough (sorry for that immage in this debate) and they will simply give up.

Well if their convictions are that weak, that's their own problem.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Well if their convictions are that weak, that's their own problem.

oh come on.

you tell someone long enough that they are a biggot because they dont want gay people to "marry" and eventually they will cave.

its got nothing to do with the strength of their convictions.

its got everything to do with being labled as a racist because of your convictions.

 

[Kelzie]

oh come on.

you tell someone long enough that they are a biggot because they dont want gay people to "marry" and eventually they will cave.

its got nothing to do with the strength of their convictions.

its got everything to do with being labled as a racist because of your convictions.

Hey, whatever it takes. If they've got no good argument why gay marriage shouldn't be legal, then they likely will change their mind. Kinda like if you call a chauvinist a sexist long enough, he'll eventually cave to social pressure, at least in public. Looks like the right direction to be going in to me.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Hey, whatever it takes. If they've got no good argument why gay marriage shouldn't be legal, then they likely will change their mind. Kinda like if you call a chauvinist a sexist long enough, he'll eventually cave to social pressure, at least in public. Looks like the right direction to be going in to me.

yeah. I guess if NAMBLA hangs on long enough, they may convince everyone child molestation is acceptable.

after all, if they got a good argument the rest of us will have to cave to social pressure.

 

[BigDog]

yeah. I guess if NAMBLA hangs on long enough, they may convince everyone child molestation is acceptable.

after all, if they got a good argument the rest of us will have to cave to social pressure.

This is illogical.

A good argument can always be made against NAMBLA because it is inherently different than homosexuality.

 

[Kelzie]

yeah. I guess if NAMBLA hangs on long enough, they may convince everyone child molestation is acceptable.

after all, if they got a good argument the rest of us will have to cave to social pressure.

Mmm, I doubt it. They have yet to provide a good argument that children are mentally developed enough to realize the ramification of sex. I am highly doubtful that this will change, but then I'm sure you knew that.

However, there is no good argument that I have seen about why gay people should not be able to get married.

 

[ProudAmerican]

However, there is no good argument that I have seen about why gay people should not be able to get married.

this is where the debate truly lies.

there are plenty of good arguments. it just depends on your definition of good.

I think the argument that they want to convince the mainstream its an acceptable practice is a good one. if that wasnt the case, they would be fine with calling it a "civil union"
as long as they get the same rights as everyone else, whats the difference?

but we have already been down that road.

 

[Kelzie]

this is where the debate truly lies.

there are plenty of good arguments. it just depends on your definition of good.

I think the argument that they want to convince the mainstream its an acceptable practice is a good one. if that wasnt the case, they would be fine with calling it a "civil union"
as long as they get the same rights as everyone else, whats the difference?

but we have already been down that road.

Well if they are able to convince the mainstream, what's the problem? Obviously it is a valid ideal then. All social progress took time to convince the public. Gay marriage is no different.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Well if they are able to convince the mainstream, what's the problem? Obviously it is a valid ideal then. All social progress took time to convince the public. Gay marriage is no different.

having the same rights under a "civil union" is social progress. is it not?

 

[Kelzie]

having the same rights under a "civil union" is social progress. is it not?

Of course. However, not calling it marriage implies that their relationship is still inferior to hetero's.

Like I said, many homosexuals I know don't care what it's called. I'm just less willing to compromise.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Of course. However, not calling it marriage implies that their relationship is still inferior to hetero's.

Like I said, many homosexuals I know don't care what it's called. I'm just less willing to compromise.

I dont see it as being inferior.

just different. and no one can argue that it is different.

 

[Kelzie]

I dont see it as being inferior.

just different. and no one can argue that it is different.

Ah yes. Much like seperate water fountains and bathrooms? Seperate yet equal was struck down for a reason. The very notion is in fact not equal.

And I see no difference in a hetero or homo marriage. At least no difference that's relevant to the definition of marriage.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Ah yes. Much like seperate water fountains and bathrooms? Seperate yet equal was struck down for a reason. The very notion is in fact not equal.

And I see no difference in a hetero or homo marriage. At least no difference that's relevant to the definition of marriage.

you make a really good argument. My opinion wont change on the topic because of my belief that marraige is a sacred tradition that has always meant the union of a man and a woman. and because of my religious beliefs.

but your argument is a good one that definately deserves consideration.

:mrgreen:

 

[Kelzie]

you make a really good argument. My opinion wont change on the topic because of my belief that marraige is a sacred tradition that has always meant the union of a man and a woman. and because of my religious beliefs.

but your argument is a good one that definately deserves consideration.

:mrgreen:

:lol: Thanks. The same thing happens to me in abortion debates. It's rather difficult to change a person's beliefs because they are, by their very nature illogical. At least you can get past your beliefs and support civil unions. That's better than most.

 

[ProudAmerican]

:lol: Thanks. The same thing happens to me in abortion debates. It's rather difficult to change a person's beliefs because they are, by their very nature illogical. At least you can get past your beliefs and support civil unions. That's better than most.

omg, I cant get into abortion today. my head already hurts from having to give you some credit on this topic.

:stars:

 

[Kelzie]

omg, I cant get into abortion today. my head already hurts from having to give you some credit on this topic.

:stars:

Ha ha. I try not to debate abortion. There's just no compromise on the issue.

 

[Jerry]

Ah yes. Much like seperate water fountains and bathrooms? Seperate yet equal was struck down for a reason. The very notion is in fact not equal.

And I see no difference in a hetero or homo marriage. At least no difference that's relevant to the definition of marriage.

She said "different", not "separate". Much like different restrooms for different genders.

Call me Caption Obvious but same-sex 'marriage is different from opposite-sex ‘marriage in that the former has only one gender and the latter has 2 genders.

 

[Kelzie]

She said "different", not "separate". Much like different restrooms for different genders.

Call me Caption Obvious but same-sex 'marriage is different from opposite-sex ‘marriage in that the former has only one gender and the latter has 2 genders.

Well, Captain Obvious, the gender of the people in a marriage matter little in regards to why it is being carried out. Marriage is an expression of love and committment. Hardly matters how many genders are involved and in that regard, there is no difference.

 

[Jerry]

Well, Captain Obvious, the gender of the people in a marriage matter little in regards to why it is being carried out. Marriage is an expression of love and committment. Hardly matters how many genders are involved and in that regard, there is no difference.

And on that point we disagree. Marriage is so much more than a simple expression of love and commitment, but an elevation of that which any ally-cat or "consenting adult" can do to something far greater.

Women are not irrelevant to the family, so I can not support 2 men marrying.
Men are not irrelevant to the family, so I can not support 2 women marrying.