View Poll Results: Should civil unions replace marriage for legal purposes?

Voters
66. You may not vote on this poll
  • The term civil union should replace the term marriage for legal purposes

    15 22.73%
  • Both terms, civil union (for gay couples)and marriage (for straight), should be used

    25 37.88%
  • The term marriage should be use equally for gay and straight couples

    21 31.82%
  • Gay couples should not be able to have the rights of marriage at all.

    5 7.58%
Page 28 of 35 FirstFirst ... 182627282930 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 345

Thread: Civil Unions

  1. #271
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:30 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,643

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by emdash View Post
    for this argument's sake, and for clarity, Discrimination with a big D is the bad kind, the racist, sexist, evil bigoted kind.
    discrimination with a little d just means selective judgment based on relevant characteristics. denying loans to people with bad credit is discrimination.

    automatically assuming Discrimination is taking place is impetuous. when someone makes that call, I immediately want to know what the Discrimination is based on. race? gender? orientation?

    one gender is not being discriminated against in the issue of gay marriage. if both genders--and thus all genders--are subject to the same rules, any discrimination taking place cannot logically be based on gender.

    men and women are not allowed to share bathrooms, but their bathrooms are equally operative, the same size with the same cleaning staff. is this a case of "separate but equal" terrible Discrimination? which gender is being treated unfairly? it is functional discrimination with a little d.

    a hateful mexican who will not allow nonmexicans in his restaurant is not racist if he won't allow mexicans either. he's just a jerk and a poor businessman.

    I'm trying to find a post that states my entire argument. maybe I will post a PM I sent to YamiB.
    I didn't respond becuase I essentially agree with you regarding all of this...

    Except the part that if two genders are being discriminated against that this somehow magically negates Discrimination. If people are being banned from something based on gender or sexual orientation, then it doesn't matter if it is one or two genders, this is ridiculous. That is why the Mexican analogy does work. If a Mexican discriminates against all races, then he is Discriminating all races. A law set up to stop all same sex marriages in Discriminating against both genders for the reasons of disallowing same sex marriages due to their sexual orientation. It is Discriminating against me even, a hetero, for I am denied the right to marry a man if I chose to do so. This is illogical and there is no logical reason for such Discrimination.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  2. #272
    Old Soul

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    ND
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 09:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    I didn't respond becuase I essentially agree with you regarding all of this...
    bff

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    Except the part that if two genders are being discriminated against that this somehow magically negates Discrimination. If people are being banned from something based on gender or sexual orientation, then it doesn't matter if it is one or two genders, this is ridiculous. That is why the Mexican analogy does work. If a Mexican discriminates against all races, then he is Discriminating all races. A law set up to stop all same sex marriages in Discriminating against both genders for the reasons of disallowing same sex marriages due to their sexual orientation. It is Discriminating against me even, a hetero, for I am denied the right to marry a man if I chose to do so. This is illogical and there is no logical reason for such Discrimination.
    if he "discriminates" against people of all races including his own then it's meaningless to call him racist or to imply that his hatred is based on race at all.

    if smoking becomes illegal for men and also for women, the government is not discriminating based on gender, though both genders are affected.

    if two genders are being discriminated against instead of one, it does not necessarily negate all discrimination but it negates the idea of gender discrimination.

    abuse is not Discrimination unless it is based on a characteristic shared by those being mistreated, such as gender, age or skin color. for example, it can be argued that females are discriminated against in the workplace and males are discriminated against in custody battles, because in both cases one gender is given deferential treatment. if in the case of gay marriage neither males nor females are receiving worse treatment than the other as a gender group, gender is not the common characteristic you are looking for.

    it is more likely to be orientation: that is, a person's preference for either his own gender or the opposite. I think before we were having issues with the definition of orientation. you were using it to mean "the gender a person is attracted to" and I was using it to mean "a person's preference for his own gender or the opposite," so that practically our definitions would translate, respectively, to "his orientation is for males" or "his orientation is homosexual."

    in this way I could very well say that everyone affected by gay marriage laws has the same orientation (homosexual), but you would disagree, saying that half of them are attracted to men (gay) and half to women (lesbians).

    with my definition, you could argue that orientation discrimination is taking place, in that the government is abusing homosexuals (and only homosexuals), while heterosexuals are shown deferential treatment.

    I would then rebut, any adult may enter into a marriage contract if he meets the terms, and his orientation is never asked for or even taken into consideration. that would leave us right back where we started, arguing about the government's role and purpose in marriage, but blissfully free of all rhetoric like "discrimination," "bigotry," etc., which are distracting and unhelpful.

  3. #273
    Old Soul

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    ND
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 09:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    That's me... I'm one of those.
    me too and it's only getting worse. I blame barack obama.

  4. #274
    Advisor DGomez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    09-20-11 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    380

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    But that's not a marriage license, licenses are issued by the state, not the Catholic Church. Besides, even if the church could issue licenses, they would not refuse to issue one because one did not breed, but they could recind one after the fact for someone not breeding somewhere down the line.
    I said that they were issued by the state. However, the state will abide by the rules of the religion.

    Any church can refuse to issue the state license. That's a privilege they reserve being a private institution. So if homosexual marriage was made legal, for example, a church still does not have to perform the ceremony. Most Catholic churches require a certain number of couples counseling sessions before a marriage. If the priest feels that the couple is not ready to be married or that the marriage would not fall in line with Catholic views (i.e. they don't want kids), it would be within his rights to refuse to perform the service.

  5. #275
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by emdash View Post
    I understand that it is the exception but I don't understand how the catholic example illustrates that point since the church doesn't give out marriage licenses in the US.
    I did my best to explain, I don't know how to be clearer. I'm sorry

  6. #276
    Old Soul

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    ND
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 09:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I did my best to explain, I don't know how to be clearer. I'm sorry
    I'm frantically PMing DGomez about it so hopefully that will help. but for now I still think catholics are irrelevant.

  7. #277
    Old Soul

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    ND
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 09:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    when you are married in a Catholic Church, you agree to various conditions which are added to your municipal license; such as alimony.

    One condition is the expectation to procreate
    if the expectation to procreate isn't in the marriage license, but in the catholic addition thereto, why does that help her argument rather than hinder it?

  8. #278
    Advisor DGomez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    09-20-11 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    380

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by emdash View Post
    if the expectation to procreate isn't in the marriage license, but in the catholic addition thereto, why does that help her argument rather than hinder it?
    Because the presiding marriage official (the priest) has the right to refuse to sign the state issued license which would make it legal.

  9. #279
    Old Soul

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    ND
    Last Seen
    10-18-13 @ 09:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,915

    Re: Civil Unions

    Quote Originally Posted by DGomez View Post
    Because the presiding marriage official (the priest) has the right to refuse to sign the state issued license which would make it legal.
    but you don't need a priest anyway. the church doesn't issue licenses, the state does. the church is entirely optional. why does the church even matter in this discussion?

  10. #280
    User BetterHalf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Western NC
    Last Seen
    05-03-09 @ 09:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33

    Re: Civil Unions

    Pooks will disagree but I think the term marriage should be used for both straight and gay couples who pledge their lives to each other, forsaking all others, til death do you part.
    One thing that doesn't make any sense whatsoever is living in a free country like this but not bothering to vote.
    --Pookie

Page 28 of 35 FirstFirst ... 182627282930 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •