View Poll Results: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

Voters
430. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    186 43.26%
  • Yes, explain

    244 56.74%
Page 121 of 192 FirstFirst ... 2171111119120121122123131171 ... LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,210 of 1915

Thread: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

  1. #1201
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,745

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by sweEt Mauritius View Post
    When has "to stop some of the bickering" ever been a legitimate reason for the state to create separate but completely equal institutions. The only reason to create civil unions with all of the exact same rights as civil marriage is to appease the people who are uncomfortable with the legal term marriage. That's not a legitimate reason, and I won't settle for it when there's not a compelling state interest.
    If you had been paying attention to what I advocated, it in no way was “separate but equal”, but instead would be just “equal”.

    As to “to stop some of the bickering”, I admit it’s not a really good reason…But think of all the time and money spent quarrelling about this issue that could be saved by simply bypassing the whole thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Centrist77 View Post
    …Stuff and things, edited for brevity…
    Ok.

    As I understand the current situation, anyone can religiously/socially/personally join themselves to one or more other persons, divorced (pun intended) from any laws regarding marriage.

    As they are not married under the law, the law has no bearing on such a union.

    ----------------------------------

    However, if they wish to reap the legal/financial benefits of a legal marriage, they must acquire a legal document that joins them in a legal/financial sense.

    As it currently stands, in most states only one male and one female can acquire this document, as laws (I think) prevent any other legal marriage.

    If my understanding is correct, that limitation is the bone of contention at the root of this issue.

    Gay couples wish to have the same financial/legal union that heterosexual couples have, and are denied such.

    ------------------------------------

    My personal idea to solve this has been presented several times on this forum, but here goes again:

    Eliminate marriage as a government/legal institution.

    Replace it with a solely legal/financial institution, controlled by government for X purpose (as ideas differ on what that purpose is, I left it open), and applied in a fair manner (thus including anyone who meets the criteria required, for example: “at least two (2) children must be raised to adulthood as a result of this union”). Restricting such to only hetero couples would seem an easily challenged action, legally.
    Ensure that this new institution is completely devoid of any reference to religious marriage and it’s trappings, so that in no way can it be confused/misunderstood/challenged/whatever.
    Basically, eliminate the grounds for debate (although it will still happen to an extent).
    ------------------------------------
    Now, as I see it, this would allow both gay and heterosexual couples to gain the legal/financial benefits if they wish (assuming they meet whatever arbitrary standards the government issuing the legal document set). If those standards are unreasonable, legal challenges will most likely occur.

    ------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------

    But, as I have realized, this makes little sense to some people, and others disagree on various points.

    So…Meh.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #1202
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    If you had been paying attention to what I advocated, it in no way was “separate but equal”, but instead would be just “equal”.

    As to “to stop some of the bickering”, I admit it’s not a really good reason…But think of all the time and money spent quarrelling about this issue that could be saved by simply bypassing the whole thing.
    Ok.

    As I understand the current situation, anyone can religiously/socially/personally join themselves to one or more other persons, divorced (pun intended) from any laws regarding marriage.

    As they are not married under the law, the law has no bearing on such a union.

    ----------------------------------

    However, if they wish to reap the legal/financial benefits of a legal marriage, they must acquire a legal document that joins them in a legal/financial sense.

    As it currently stands, in most states only one male and one female can acquire this document, as laws (I think) prevent any other legal marriage.

    If my understanding is correct, that limitation is the bone of contention at the root of this issue.

    Gay couples wish to have the same financial/legal union that heterosexual couples have, and are denied such.

    ------------------------------------

    My personal idea to solve this has been presented several times on this forum, but here goes again:

    Eliminate marriage as a government/legal institution.

    Replace it with a solely legal/financial institution, controlled by government for X purpose (as ideas differ on what that purpose is, I left it open), and applied in a fair manner (thus including anyone who meets the criteria required, for example: “at least two (2) children must be raised to adulthood as a result of this union”). Restricting such to only hetero couples would seem an easily challenged action, legally.
    Ensure that this new institution is completely devoid of any reference to religious marriage and it’s trappings, so that in no way can it be confused/misunderstood/challenged/whatever.
    Basically, eliminate the grounds for debate (although it will still happen to an extent).
    ------------------------------------
    Now, as I see it, this would allow both gay and heterosexual couples to gain the legal/financial benefits if they wish (assuming they meet whatever arbitrary standards the government issuing the legal document set). If those standards are unreasonable, legal challenges will most likely occur.

    ------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------

    But, as I have realized, this makes little sense to some people, and others disagree on various points.

    So…Meh.
    I totally agree with the "theory" of your stand and IF it would work that be GREAT!!! Just to make sure we understand eachother im not saying YOU want to discriminate im just saying I just dont see how people wouldnt see it has offensive, discrimination and giving in to the crowd who wants to discriminate.

    but like you said "Meh"
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #1203
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:12 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,341
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    I have a question.

    How come the part about homosexuality is the only part of Leviticus that Christians care about?
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    I kind of wondered that myself.

    Levi does not really apply to Christians as it was the old law for the Jews, not Gentiles. It is however a good indication of what God likes and does not like. So it can be used as a reference, but the NT is what we should be following.
    Holy ****!

    Credit to BD for being honest, even when it literally destroys his argument. Levi does not really count, except when it does.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #1204
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,529

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Holy ****!

    Credit to BD for being honest, even when it literally destroys his argument. Levi does not really count, except when it does.
    How does it destroy my argument?

    #1 the New Testament also admonishes homosexuality.

    So no, it does nothing to my argument at all. I was just helping someone with a question.

    I also guess in your enthusiasm you missed this: It is however a good indication of what God likes and does not like.

    So literally it is not even close to what you are saying. It is a reference for us, nothing more.
    Last edited by Black Dog; 06-13-10 at 08:05 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  5. #1205
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,745

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Holy ****!

    Credit to BD for being honest, even when it literally destroys his argument. Levi does not really count, except when it does.
    To be fair, I did not get that from his post.

    I got:

    Levi = reference point, historical position, but not direct law/rule.

    NT = Direct law/rule.

    But then, I don’t really know all that much detail about the Bible, so…I dunno.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  6. #1206
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,529

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    To be fair, I did not get that from his post.

    I got:

    Levi = reference point, historical position, but not direct law/rule.

    NT = Direct law/rule.

    But then, I don’t really know all that much detail about the Bible, so…I dunno.
    Thats what happens when you have no agenda and don't read things into a post that are not there.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  7. #1207
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    To be fair, I did not get that from his post.

    I got:

    Levi = reference point, historical position, but not direct law/rule.

    NT = Direct law/rule.

    But then, I don’t really know all that much detail about the Bible, so…I dunno.
    I agree i didnt quite get that either, although OT and NT and such seems hypocritical in its self to me, not saying BlackDog but just in saying in GENERAL how one book(s) is taken and rewritten and re interrupted over and over again to get different meanings at times and then argued and preached has fact and gospel.

    but like you I also don pretend to know all religions and meanings and books
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #1208
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Holy ****!

    Credit to BD for being honest, even when it literally destroys his argument. Levi does not really count, except when it does.
    I responded in another thread that i didnt get this from what he wrote but either way in general the bold parts have already happened without this post
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  9. #1209
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:05 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    64,049

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    In your opinion, lol.
    No... wrong is an opinion. This is not a math problem.

    Actually it would depend on which state constitution you look at.
    Irrelevant. It is still a "TERM". Terms can be defined in various ways... hence the dictionary and it's various explainations of said terms and words.

    This is absolutely not true. In this country it is the PC or leftist crowed that has tried to hijack the meaning. Up until the last what? 20 years it meant one man and one woman, period. Before that it was literally a religious institution until the government decided to get involved.
    Nope. Marriage is a word with a definition. You can marry two ketchup bottles by combining the contents and making them one. The Religious, once they felt threatened, started trying to narroww the wide definition to a religious. The term marriage is about taking two things and combining them into one. That is it. To try and define mariage as a man and a woman is my point, it is invalid and irrelevant.

    So you tell me who hijacked what?
    The religious right.

    No I am not. I am showing intolerance for the life style and not the person. No animosity is involved in any way. So no.
    Yeah, intolerance. so... yes. Lifestyle? Person? Irrelevant. You are trying to stop the people due to Intolerant opinions. Point made. Thanks...
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldFatGuy View Post
    Usually a gag for wise mouthed insulting little girls. Then some good nylon rope so I can tie them up, toss them in the trunk of my car and forget about them.

  10. #1210
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,529

    Re: Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    No... wrong is an opinion. This is not a math problem.

    Irrelevant. It is still a "TERM". Terms can be defined in various ways... hence the dictionary and it's various explainations of said terms and words.

    Nope. Marriage is a word with a definition. You can marry two ketchup bottles by combining the contents and making them one. The Religious, once they felt threatened, started trying to narroww the wide definition to a religious. The term marriage is about taking two things and combining them into one. That is it. To try and define mariage as a man and a woman is my point, it is invalid and irrelevant.

    The religious right.

    Yeah, intolerance. so... yes. Lifestyle? Person? Irrelevant. You are trying to stop the people due to Intolerant opinions. Point made. Thanks...
    This is so much nothing, I am just going to say OK, you win.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

Posting Permissions

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