- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 66,863
- Reaction score
- 30,126
- Location
- Rolesville, NC
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Some do not know what marriage is, nor its purpose.
To the homosexuals I say this..
Sorry about your predicament, but we designed marriage for one man and one woman, with the end result being procreation..
At the time when marriage was being designed and implemented, a few hundred thousand years back in time, no one in their right mind ever thought about the homosexual thing.
A civil union is fine with me.
Some do not know what marriage is, nor its purpose.
To the homosexuals I say this..
Sorry about your predicament, but we designed marriage for one man and one woman, with the end result being procreation..
At the time when marriage was being designed and implemented, a few hundred thousand years back in time, no one in their right mind ever thought about the homosexual thing.
A civil union is fine with me.
Some do not know what marriage is, nor its purpose.
To the homosexuals I say this..
Sorry about your predicament, but we designed marriage for one man and one woman, with the end result being procreation..
At the time when marriage was being designed and implemented, a few hundred thousand years back in time, no one in their right mind ever thought about the homosexual thing.
A civil union is fine with me.
Some do not know what marriage is, nor its purpose.
To the homosexuals I say this..
Sorry about your predicament, but we designed marriage for one man and one woman, with the end result being procreation..
At the time when marriage was being designed and implemented, a few hundred thousand years back in time, no one in their right mind ever thought about the homosexual thing.
A civil union is fine with me.
Some do not know what marriage is, nor its purpose.
Sorry about your predicament, but we designed marriage for one man and one woman, with the end result being procreation...
Since it appears that some wish to discuss gays getting married (again), I figured I'd start another poll about it. A little different spin on this one than I've seen in at least a while, although the argument is common in gay rights threads.
(Besides, there doesn't seem to be a single poll about it on the first or second page of the Polls section, so I figure I'll change that.)
Is same sex marriage a special right or equal protection?
Please explain all answers so we can have a good debate about this.
I tend to view the issue as a political payoff for support of the democratic party and it's use of identity politics. Why didn't you include that as an option?
I tend to view the issue as a political payoff for support of the democratic party and it's use of identity politics. Why didn't you include that as an option?
Civil unions is equal protection. The same benefits straight couples have should be afforded to them.
Marriage is a religious institution at its root. If Gays want civil unions, fair enough. But marriage is religious domain and if the religious do not want to let them in. They should accept it, be happy with civil unions and move on.
Marriage is a religious institution at its root. If Gays want civil unions, fair enough. But marriage is religious domain and if the religious do not want to let them in. They should accept it, be happy with civil unions and move on.
Religion does not own marriage.
If such a "compromise" were the only way, then every couple should have to accept it, opposite and same sex couples.
No it's not, at it's roots, marriage is for cementing alliances between families, and historically it's a polygamous and patriarchal system. And even if you were to go with the religious path, marriage has existed as far back as ancient Greece, and they had a certain fondness for buggery.
What about those of us who are for gay marriage, but don't support the Democrat party?
That is fine. If they find a priest willing to do the ceremony. Good for them.
Still a civil union in paper and should remain as such until the religious (no idea for US but in UK Church of England) accepts it. Which it won't.
It shouldn't be forced to change. In UK Straight people cannot get a civil union only a marriage. I can't speak for US because I have no idea how it is there.
Gays have civil unions which is legally the exact same as marriage. The same rights and benefits.
I support civil partnerships and unions for the gay community however the moment any Gay community tries to force religious institutions through Parliament into acknowledging marriage for them is when they lose my support and the motion passing through Parliament which is trying to make this happen will have my MP's opposition :shrug:
Because...
a) I'm not a Democrat, but I still support same sex marriage.
b) If something is good, I don't care who is using it for their political gain. Support for a particular issue, like same sex marriage, should be about the issue, not the party or a particular candidate or how any of those use that issue. You can always support an issue and not the person/party that is pushing it. If not, then you are playing politics yourself.
No religion has a right, in the US, to tell the government that they should not recognize certain couples' marriages because they don't believe that the couple "fits" the true definition of marriage. The marriage license is a legal contract, not a religious one.
So, you agree the issue is a political one being used by the democratic party for political gain?
US is amongst those countries which is secular. In UK, we have a established religion and institution COE and Protestants playing a role and having a opinion in our laws. They sit in Parliament and can vote/oppose a law if they choose to.
In UK, I think Gays have nothing to complain about compared to US where they can't even adopt or be recognised as a couple in all states.
I think US Gays should be lobbying for civil unions and maybe they will pick up more support from the religious in US. Rather than trying to use the term 'marriage'.
I personally think both sides are using it for political gain, just in opposite ways.
Many people who support same sex marriage here are doing many things to try to get it, but we have come to realize that our biggest hope for getting it the fastest is just continuing to challenge discriminatory/unconstitutional laws in court, such as DOMA and laws that bar gay couples from adopting children from public adoption agencies or through the state. In fact, once DOMA goes away/down, it won't matter if there are some states here that won't actually grant marriage licenses to same sex couples, because due to the 14th Amendment's Full Faith and Credit Clause, those states will be forced to legally recognize same sex marriages that are performed in other states.
You mean by forcing the issue on the american people whether they support it or not. Pity.
By doing what is constitutional, no matter what the just-slightly-a-majority wants. DOMA changes a part of the Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment's FF&CC to discriminate against a group of people. To be legal, it should have gone through the proper methods and actually became an Amendment to the Constitution (which is normally done through a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress followed by having to be approved by 3/4ths of the states). Congress didn't have the numbers then (and most likely don't have the numbers now) to get this done constitutionally.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?