If you oppose same-sex marriage, you are...

Lachean said:

You would have people tested for fertility before they could marry? :shock:

Click to expand...

People for the longest time did have to take blood tests before getting married. So no, not really.

Blackdog said:

There is a difference as I pointed out earlier in this thread. I am talking about purely under the law.

Click to expand...

You said because gays can not procreate. So when heterosexuals that can not procreate are barred from state recognition you might have a point. In the mean time......you have to come up with a better reason.

winston53660 said:

So why are you so caught up in the legal codification of the terms?

Click to expand...

Because I see marriage as between a man and a woman as I am a Christian. I don't think the government should really be involved at all to be honest. The churches should be allowed to marry who they want and then the state can take it from there.

winston53660 said:

You said because gays can not procreate.

Click to expand...

No I did not. I said the state would have no real interest in it. Huge difference.

winston53660 said:

So when heterosexuals that can not procreate are barred from state recognition you might have a point. In the mean time......you have to come up with a better reason.

Click to expand...

That is not my reason and you are at this point lying about what I said.

And you are still avoiding my question, I wonder why?

PS I already said I would not have a problem with couples who cannot reproduce not getting married. So you have no excuse to doge anymore.

Just be honest.

Blackdog said:

Because I see marriage as between a man and a woman as I am a Christian.

Click to expand...

That is fine with me.

I don't think the government should really be involved at all to be honest. The churches should be allowed to marry who they want and then the state can take it from there.

Click to expand...

There are so many issues involved it is next to impossible not to have the state involved. Personally I think the state should drop the word marriage all together.

If you oppose same-sex marriage, you are...

a. ...rather arrogant to assume you have any right sticking your nose in business that truly does not concern you and most likely angry that you do not have enough authority to run the lives of other people as you would like.

b. ...a lonely person that really should get a life.

c. ...just someone who likes to spread negativity, whine and stomp your feet about harmless issues that don't mean **** to a tree.

d. ...not invited to a lot of parties.

e. ...a Lawrence Welk fan and a Geritol devotee.

f. ... delusional religious nut.

g. ... all of the above?

:rofl

Blackdog said:

No I did not. I said the state would have no real interest in it. Huge difference.



That is not my reason and you are at this point lying about what I said.

And you are still avoiding my question, I wonder why?

PS I already said I would not have a problem with couples who cannot reproduce not getting married. So you have no excuse to doge anymore.

Just be honest.

Click to expand...

Could you clarify what your question was in a lucid concise manner?

It might be my fault for not getting it or maybe you just were not clear enough. Either way I would like you to ask it again.

winston53660 said:

Could you clarify what your question was in a lucid concise manner?

It might be my fault for not getting it or maybe you just were not clear enough. Either way I would like you to ask it again.

Click to expand...

It was the fault of your edit after I responded, lol.

All I am asking is...

If gay couples get all of the same rights under the law as heterosexual couples do under a civil union. Why does it matter to so many gay couples it be called marriage?

Captain America said:

If you oppose same-sex marriage, you are...

a. ...rather arrogant to assume you have any right sticking your nose in business that truly does not concern you and most likely angry that you do not have enough authority to run the lives of other people as you would like.

b. ...a lonely person that really should get a life.

c. ...just someone who likes to spread negativity, whine and stomp your feet about harmless issues that don't mean **** to a tree.

d. ...not invited to a lot of parties.

e. ...a Lawrence Welk fan and a Geritol devotee.

f. ... delusional religious nut.

g. ... all of the above?

:rofl

Click to expand...

Wow, really in poor taste. I expected better.

Blackdog said:

It was the fault of your edit after I responded, lol.

All I am asking is...

If gay couples get all of the same rights under the law as heterosexual couples do under a civil union. Why does it matter to so many gay couples it be called marriage?

Click to expand...

Because it is a legal term. If it was all called civil union heterosexual or homosexual under the law I'm sure there would be alot less of a problem. Of course there would be the screamers on both sides but they would be a lot less few.

Blackdog said:

It was the fault of your edit after I responded, lol.

All I am asking is...

If gay couples get all of the same rights under the law as heterosexual couples do under a civil union. Why does it matter to so many gay couples it be called marriage?

Click to expand...

What does it matter if they do? The semantics are meaningless here.

Doesn't a rose by any other name smell just as sweet?

I'm opposed to gay marriage because I'm opposed to marriage. What does that make me?

If you oppose state recognition of same-sex marriage, then:

1. You could be a bigot and think its the same as allowing adults to marry animals or children.

2. It could be for religious reasons.

3. You are obviously either ignorant of the basic principles of liberty, or you don't care.

winston53660 said:

Because it is a legal term. If it was all called civil union heterosexual or homosexual under the law I'm sure there would be alot less of a problem. Of course there would be the screamers on both sides but they would be a lot less few.

Click to expand...

I disagree.

It is about the religious sanctity of a bond between a man and a woman, it is not a civil union to me. I agreed to love honor and cherish my wife till death. That is allot more than some civil union recognized by the state. It is a marriage recognized by God.

If the marriage benefits of the state were to disappear tomorrow, my marriage would still be intact, it would change nothing.

The really sad thing is since the interference of government in marriage it has cheapened it, and what it was supposed to stand for. Things like making divorce to easy for stupid reasons.

To bad the majority of so called Christian couples don't see what hypocrites they are with being married 3 times or more.

Anyway I talk the talk and walk the walk for my principles. I hope you will continue to do the same.

Lachean said:

What does it matter if they do? The semantics are meaningless here.

Doesn't a rose by any other name smell just as sweet?

Click to expand...

I explained it in the post above.

None of the above. Slandering the opposition to gay marriage by calling them bigoted, ignorant,homophobic, stupid or some other blatant lie will not win the gay marriage proponents any cool points.

ignorant? - If you're defining this as different than stupid, then I'll say no for this one because I'm not really sure what you mean. Most opponents of same-sex marriage are ignorant in the sense that they've never actually known a gay person though. No, the guy who works in the other department at your office, who you never talk to, doesn't count as a "gay friend."

bigoted? - Usually. They want to deny civil rights to another group of people...and pretty much every argument against same-sex marriage is ultimately rooted in a desire to hurt homosexuals, no matter how much opponents want to cloak it in other rationalizations.

homophobic? - This is the same as bigoted, so yes.

stupid (which differs from ignorant)? - Again, I'm not sure what difference you see between these two terms. But every argument against gay marriage that I've ever heard is stupid. Not just in the sense that I might disagree with their viewpoint, like I would for, say, health care or foreign policy. I'm talking downright, indefensible, illogical stupidity.

unreasonable? - Yes. If there are any reasonable arguments against gay marriage, I have yet to hear them.

unenlightened? - Yup. Same-sex marriage doesn't affect you at all. I don't know of anyone who is trying to make it mandatory.




Now to preempt the attacks I'm going to get from conservatives, replace the words "same-sex marriage" in the poll question with "interracial marriage" (and obviously change "homophobic" to "racist"). Now how many of those adjectives do YOU believe apply?

And before you try to rationalize how the issue of interracial marriage and same-sex marriage have absolutely nothing in common, please read what I wrote under "stupid" and "unreasonable." This kind of rationalization is exactly what I'm talking about.

Blackdog said:

I explained it in the post above.

Click to expand...

No you really didn't, all you explained is that you regard your bond as greater than anyone's who your god would not approve of, or anyone who has gotten divorced before.

But there is no reason to believe that your god exists, nor does his existence or nonexistence have ANYTHING to do with a legal term from a SECULAR government.

Your union is no more sacred than any others.

SouthernDemocrat said:

If you oppose state recognition of same-sex marriage, then:

1. You could be a bigot and think its the same as allowing adults to marry animals or children.

2. It could be for religious reasons.

3. You are obviously either ignorant of the basic principles of liberty, or you don't care.

Click to expand...

I will go with 3b.

If it isnt about sex or it isnt about love then its about money. If it isnt about money invite your family and friends to a park and just do it. Consider yourself married. No one is stopping you and thats how its been done for centuries. Stop seeking validation from someone else and worse stop trying to force feed beliefs onto others.

Seeking Validation from Others: Why It's Never Worth It


This just out. It appears the administration is 0-10 on this issue as well. A clean sweep.

The Fierce Urgency Of Whenever


"But I have a sickeningly familiar feeling in my stomach, and the feeling deepens with every interaction with the Obama team on these issues. They want them to go away. They want us to go away"

jamesrage said:

None of the above. Slandering the opposition to gay marriage by calling them bigoted, ignorant,homophobic, stupid or some other blatant lie will not win the gay marriage proponents any cool points.

Click to expand...

I agree with you if someone is just making a blanket statement in calling all those that oppose same-sex marriage as bigoted.

However, they are ignorant of what liberty entails if they oppose it.

SouthernDemocrat said:

I agree with you if someone is just making a blanket statement in calling all those that oppose same-sex marriage as bigoted.

However, they are ignorant of what liberty entails if they oppose it.

Click to expand...

Are you considering not giving a crap opposing?

jamesrage said:

None of the above. Slandering the opposition to gay marriage by calling them bigoted, ignorant,homophobic, stupid or some other blatant lie will not win the gay marriage proponents any cool points.

Click to expand...

Calling a spade a spade is not about earning cool points.

And you are a homophobe, shall I quote the many ways I know this?

Blackdog said:

I disagree.

It is about the religious sanctity of a bond between a man and a woman, it is not a civil union to me. I agreed to love honor and cherish my wife till death. That is allot more than some civil union recognized by the state. It is a marriage recognized by God.

If the marriage benefits of the state were to disappear tomorrow, my marriage would still be intact, it would change nothing.

The really sad thing is since the interference of government in marriage it has cheapened it, and what it was supposed to stand for. Things like making divorce to easy for stupid reasons.

To bad the majority of so called Christian couples don't see what hypocrites they are with being married 3 times or more.

Anyway I talk the talk and walk the walk for my principles. I hope you will continue to do the same.

Click to expand...

I understand you point of view and have respect for it. But when things like this come up; transference of property, trust funds, life insurance, hospital visitation rights, etc. there are legal issues that become an issue for the state. I know gay couples that have been in 30 + year relationships and they really worry about these things. They have bought houses together and one has been the bread winner while the other took care of the home. W/O the protection of marriage the tax liabilities on their home could possibly force the surviving partner out of their family home when one or the other passed away.

I voted bigoted and homophobic, as these are the only ones that I believe are universally applicable. Ignorant, stupid, and unreasonable are certainly possibilities as well, but I wouldn't label all opponents of same-sex marriage that way. A person can be homophobic quite willfully, and act in very reasonable ways to achieve their agenda of denying equal rights to GLBT people. I wouldn't use unenlightened in any circumstance. I don't claim to be a perfectly enlightened person, and I don't expect other people to be either.



A lot of arguments can be made against same-sex marriage that don't seem homophobic or bigoted on their face, but they're riddled with logical fallacies.

We can't allow same-sex couples to get married because "marriage" is defined as being between a man and a woman - as if the definition of marriage is some universal physical law that never has and never can be changed.

We can't allow same-sex couples to get married because marriage has always been between men and women - as if history makes it right.

We can't allow same-sex couples to get married because same-sex couples can't have children - as if inability to reproduce is a legitimate basis for denying someone the right to marry, and as if natural reproduction is relevant in an age of adoption and reproductive technologies.

We can't allow same-sex couples to get married because it would be harmful to children - as if empirical evidence (link) didn't overwhelmingly contradict this.

We can't allow same-sex couples to get married because its unnatural - as if "natural," which is conveniently not defined, has anything to do with the morality of human behavior.

We can't allow same-sex couples to get married because God condemns homosexuality - as if ones thoughts on god matter in a state that is separated from the church.



The reason these arguments don't make logical sense, is because they aren't real arguments. They are merely fronts, so that people don't have to confront their own bigotry.

The real argument is:

The Institution of Marriage will be tainted if even dikes and fags can do it.

Its harsh and its ugly, and most people don't want to face their own homophobia, so they create other arguments as a distraction.

Trying to have a logical argument about the matter is almost pointless, as its not addressing the real issue. Peoples minds will never be changed about same-sex marriage, if they're hearts aren't changed first. Thats why people who personally know a GLBT person is much more likely to support GLBT rights. Its a lot harder to be bigoted against a person you know, than it is to be bigoted against an abstract concept.

In the meantime, people need to be held accountable for their bigotry. Faith can no longer be used as an excuse thats free from criticism. When a persons faith stops making sense, they change it.

Anyone who believes that God condemns homosexuality believes this because they choose to believe it.

Kandahar said:

ignorant? - If you're defining this as different than stupid, then I'll say no for this one because I'm not really sure what you mean. Most opponents of same-sex marriage are ignorant in the sense that they've never actually known a gay person though. No, the guy who you never talk to, who works in the other department at your office doesn't count as a "gay friend."

Click to expand...

I have quite a few friends who happen to be gay. To be honest no one really cared one way or the other.

Kandahar said:

bigoted? - Usually. They want to deny civil rights to another group of people...and pretty much every argument against same-sex marriage is ultimately rooted in a desire to hurt homosexuals, no matter how much opponents want to cloak it in other rationalizations.

Click to expand...

I want to preserve my way of life in my country by my principles. It has nothing to do with wanting to hurt anyone.

Kandahar said:

[homophobic? - This is the same as bigoted, so yes.

Click to expand...

:roll:

Kandahar said:

[stupid (which differs from ignorant)? - Again, I'm not sure what difference you see between these two terms. But every argument against gay marriage that I've ever heard is stupid. Not just in the sense that I might disagree with their viewpoint, like I would for, say, health care or foreign policy. I'm talking downright, indefensible, illogical stupidity.

unreasonable? - Yes. If there are any reasonable arguments against gay marriage, I have yet to hear them.

unenlightened? - Yup.

Click to expand...

Well since this is nothing but your opinion, it's cool I can except your view even if I do not agree.

Kandahar said:

Now to preempt the attacks I'm going to get from conservatives, replace the words "same-sex marriage" in the poll question with "interracial marriage" (and obviously change "homophobic" to "racist"). Now how many of those adjectives do YOU believe apply?

Click to expand...

No

Kandahar said:

And before you try to rationalize how the issue of interracial marriage and same-sex marriage have absolutely nothing in common, please read what I wrote under "stupid" and "unreasonable." This kind of rationalization is exactly what I'm talking about.

Click to expand...

Again you are welcome to your opinion, does not make it correct though.